BH13's 2020 Q1 QB Rankings

[whatdrought]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I may have missed it, but how is your final QBR calculated from the data supplied.

 

Also, if a QB fumbled 50 times in a season but his Offense recovered 45 of them, that's equivalent to a QB who only fumbles 5 times all year but recovered none of them?

 

It’s hard to judge fumbles because there’s so much luck involved. It’s easy to say a fumble is a fumble is a fumble, and that they are all negative and should be counted as much, and there’s probably truth to that- the problem, i think, is that then you have to start looking at potential interceptions- DB drops a ball, isn’t an interception, but might as well have been. Interception called back cause of personal foul on the dlineman that didn’t affect the throw at all, that doesn’t show on the stats. 
 

At that point I think you start getting too far down the rabbit hole and if you’re not careful you might run into PFF down there.

[MJS]

7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I may have missed it, but how is your final QBR calculated from the data supplied.

 

Also, if a QB fumbled 50 times in a season but his Offense recovered 45 of them, that's equivalent to a QB who only fumbles 5 times all year but recovered none of them?

A fumble isn't usually a negative play unless you don't recover it.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, whatdrought said:

 

It’s hard to judge fumbles because there’s so much luck involved. It’s easy to say a fumble is a fumble is a fumble, and that they are all negative and should be counted as much, and there’s probably truth to that- the problem, i think, is that then you have to start looking at potential interceptions- DB drops a ball, isn’t an interception, but might as well have been. Interception called back cause of personal foul on the dlineman that didn’t affect the throw at all, that doesn’t show on the stats. 
 

At that point I think you start getting too far down the rabbit hole and if you’re not careful you might run into PFF down there.

 

 

I disagree--a fumble is always a fumble and is recorded as such for obvious reasons.  A "potential interception" is a non-event.  It is simply an incomplete pass and cannot always be attributed to the QB. 

Just now, MJS said:

A fumble isn't usually a negative play unless you don't recover it.

 

It's still a fumble, by definition.  See above.

 

 

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I disagree--a fumble is always a fumble and is recorded as such for obvious reasons.  A "potential interception" is a non-event.  It is simply an incomplete pass and cannot always be attributed to the QB. 

 

It's still a fumble, by definition.  See above.

 

 

A fumble is always a fumble, yes. But it’s not always a turnover.

 

A bad pass into the belly of a DB is always a bad pass, but it isn’t always a turnover. 
 

 

[MJS]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

I disagree--a fumble is always a fumble and is recorded as such for obvious reasons.  A "potential interception" is a non-event.  It is simply an incomplete pass and cannot always be attributed to the QB. 

 

It's still a fumble, by definition.  See above.

And what does that matter? It isn't a turnover.

[BuffaloHokie13]

7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I may have missed it, but how is your final QBR calculated from the data supplied.

 

Also, if a QB fumbled 50 times in a season but his Offense recovered 45 of them, that's equivalent to a QB who only fumbles 5 times all year but recovered none of them?

A maximum of 90 points is attainable from YPT (30 max), TD% (35 max), and TO% (25 max). The final 10 points are derived from their total attempts per game compared to their peers in an effort to reward QBs who are relied on by their team to do more.

 

Yeah, the fumbles get iffy but I need them to be fumbles lost for a true turnover rate. I do apply this evenly across all QBs, so maybe there's merit in a guy who has recoverable fumbles like a qb that throws a catchable ball 😂

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, whatdrought said:

A fumble is always a fumble, yes. But it’s not always a turnover.

 

A bad pass into the belly of a DB is always a bad pass, but it isn’t always a turnover. 
 

 

 

Who recovers a fumbled ball is often random--whoever happens to be nearest it during this unexpected event.  If a QB fumbles a lot--that's a problem.  Can't really argue that, because he is lucky enough to have the fumbled ball bounce his team's way, that it's "OK".

 

Bad passes are either caught or dropped, and recorded as such.  There's no "potential fumble", so there is no need to score "potential ints".

[LabattBlue]

BH...Just curious why you use int/per game versus int%?

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Who recovers a fumbled ball is often random--whoever happens to be nearest it during this unexpected event.  If a QB fumbles a lot--that's a problem.  Can't really argue that, because he is lucky enough to have the fumbled ball bounce his team's way, that it's "OK".

 

Bad passes are either caught or dropped, and recorded as such.  There's no "potential fumble", so there is no need to score "potential ints".

I'm not sure what you are arguing. The OP uses turnovers. A recovered fumble is not a turnover.

 

Maybe you can go create your own model and use recovered fumbles as one of the metrics to ding QB's.

Edited October 6, 2020 by MJS

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, MJS said:

And what does that matter? It isn't a turnover.

 

 

So if a RB fumbles a lot, but it never results in a TO (which, like a QB, he has little control over, then his fumbling is not a problem?

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

A maximum of 90 points is attainable from YPT (30 max), TD% (35 max), and TO% (25 max). The final 10 points are derived from their total attempts per game compared to their peers in an effort to reward QBs who are relied on by their team to do more.

 

Yeah, the fumbles get iffy but I need them to be fumbles lost for a true turnover rate. I do apply this evenly across all QBs, so maybe there's merit in a guy who has recoverable fumbles like a qb that throws a catchable ball 😂

 

Thanks!

Just now, MJS said:

I'm not sure what you are arguing. The OP uses turnovers. A recovered fumble is not a turnover.

 

Maybe you can go create your own model and use recovered fumbles as one of the metrics to sing QB's.

 

See above.  I'm arguing the obvious--high fumble rate is a problem.   A QB who fumbles a lot cannot control who recovers.  All fumbles are potential TO's that he can do nothing about. The example I gave are 2 QBs who have vastly different issues with ball security.

 

Not too complicated, really.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

As many of you know and some will learn now, I set out a few years back to develop a comparative rating system that, when sorted, would more accurately line up with the eye test than traditional stats. I enter all of the data manually each week, so if you see an error please let me know! Common questions:

- fumbles refers specifically to fumbles lost, as it is factored into total turnovers

- yards per touch (YPT) is the QB's pass and rush yards, minus their sack yards, divided by their total attempts 

- the final column is my current ratings - not ESPN's garbage QBR stat

- click on the image to make it bigger. I know there's a lot of info there.

- cutoff to qualify was a minimum of 75 pass attempts

 

Anyway, let me know what you think of the order through the first quarter of the season and let's discuss! Go Bills!

 

Doesn't look a million miles off what the eye test sees. Goff a bit low, Ben a bit high but largely in line with what I think watching the league.

[BuffaloHokie13]

2 minutes ago, Back the Blue said:

BH...Just curious why you use int/per game versus int%?

No reason in particular. I just wait until the combined stats to pull a % rate. Set the sheet up that way in 2015 and haven't looked back!

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

See above.  I'm arguing the obvious--high fumble rate is a problem.   A QB who fumbles a lot cannot control who recovers.  All fumbles are potential TO's that he can do nothing about. The example I gave are 2 QBs who have vastly different issues with ball security.

 

Not too complicated, really.

 

You're obviously not wrong... QB's that fumble a lot (or any player for that matter) are problematic and need to be addressed... The difference is when it comes to evaluating what a QB does or doesn't do (and especially when it's in regards to ranking) it's not fair to use non-turnovers/potential turnovers unless you're going to use potential interceptions as well.

 

Dak had like 5 balls bounce off the Browns hands the other day but only threw one interception. When we look at his stat line we see one turnover. Allen might fumble three times, but when we look at his stat line, the important thing for comparing the two is how many turnovers there are. 

 

Then, on monday in the QB room we address the issue of the ball being on the carpet three times.

[MarkyMannn]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

I like it. Would the rankings change if you removed Allen's fake INT?

HAHA I was going to ask the same thing.  Nice work on that spreadsheet Hokie.  Seems last 20 years Bills had QB's that would be on the bottom half of a ranking like that

Edited October 6, 2020 by MarkyMannn

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, MJS said:

A fumble isn't usually a negative play unless you don't recover it.

Fumble should always be negative as recoveries are generally a function of luck

[TheElectricCompany]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

I like it. Would the rankings change if you removed Allen's fake INT?

 

Well, we'd need to do so for all the other QBs too...

Either way, Josh is playing like a top dog in 2020. Some guys are low for my taste, others are high, but this is a very good problem to have.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

 

You're obviously not wrong... QB's that fumble a lot (or any player for that matter) are problematic and need to be addressed... The difference is when it comes to evaluating what a QB does or doesn't do (and especially when it's in regards to ranking) it's not fair to use non-turnovers/potential turnovers unless you're going to use potential interceptions as well.

 

Dak had like 5 balls bounce off the Browns hands the other day but only threw one interception. When we look at his stat line we see one turnover. Allen might fumble three times, but when we look at his stat line, the important thing for comparing the two is how many turnovers there are. 

 

Then, on monday in the QB room we address the issue of the ball being on the carpet three times.

 

A fumble is a loss of control of the ball.  The QB cannot with any frequency control what happens next.  It's up for grabs.  A dropped INT is an incomplete pass with no loss of possession. If he tosses an int and then the opposing DB fumbles the INT  and the Bills recover, it results in no loss of possession for the Bills, but an INT and a fumble both actually occurred.  A dropped int is only an incomplete pass.

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

A fumble is a loss of control of the ball.  The QB cannot with any frequency control what happens next.  It's up for grabs.  A dropped INT is an incomplete pass with no loss of possession. If he tosses an int and then the opposing DB fumbles the INT  and the Bills recover, it results in no loss of possession for the Bills, but an INT and a fumble both actually occurred.  A dropped int is only an incomplete pass.

So you’re saying that firing the ball into the chest of a DB only to have it drop to the ground is not a loss of control of the ball by the QB? He was in control of the ball at that time?

[MJS]

9 minutes ago, TheElectricCompany said:

 

Well, we'd need to do so for all the other QBs too...

Either way, Josh is playing like a top dog in 2020. Some guys are low for my taste, others are high, but this is a very good problem to have.

All the other fake INT's? Pretty sure that number is zero.

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

A fumble is a loss of control of the ball.  The QB cannot with any frequency control what happens next.  It's up for grabs.  A dropped INT is an incomplete pass with no loss of possession. If he tosses an int and then the opposing DB fumbles the INT  and the Bills recover, it results in no loss of possession for the Bills, but an INT and a fumble both actually occurred.  A dropped int is only an incomplete pass.

Yeah, an incomplete pass occured. Just like a recovered fumble occured. Both are negative plays with minimal impact.

[Mr. WEO]

7 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

So you’re saying that firing the ball into the chest of a DB only to have it drop to the ground is not a loss of control of the ball by the QB? He was in control of the ball at that time?

 

 

 Well by that reasoning, every pass  is a "loss of control of the ball by the QB"....

 

But no, it's just a bad pass.  QB has the ability (by definition) to control where he throws the ball.  He has little or no control as to where the ball goes after he fumbles.  

 

 

6 minutes ago, MJS said:

All the other fake INT's? Pretty sure that number is zero.

Yeah, an incomplete pass occured. Just like a recovered fumble occured. Both are negative plays with minimal impact.

 

Let's put this another way:

 

One QB fumbles 50 times and his team recovers 48 times so he has only "2 turnovers"

 

Another QB fumbles 50 times and his team can only recover 5, so he has "45 turnovers"

 

Which QB is better at  protecting the ball?

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mr. WEO