Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 If you combine rushing yards in the yards per attempt statistic for QB's, which you should, JP outranks all these guys this year. I wouldn't exactly say the Bills WR's or OL are more talented then most these teams either. This is what you start to see from a guy who's progressing at QB. The yards per attempt increases, the INT's and TD's also increase. The last stage of the normal progression is for the INT's to level off.
Dibs Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 If you combine rushing yards in the yards per attempt statistic for QB's, which you should.....811596[/snapback] If you are going to do that, you should also add the attempts & loss of yards from each QBs sacks. And to preempt the argument that sacks are mainly caused by bad OL play, a QBs rushing attepts/yards are increased by a bad OL too.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 And to preempt the argument that sacks are mainly caused by bad OL play, a QBs rushing attepts/yards are increased by a bad OL too. 811599[/snapback] Sack yardage lost is not considered lost rushing yards to a QB in the NFL, that’s why it wasn't included. Even if it was I still wouldn't dish out sack yardage to a QB because it is a blend of several things. JP's clearly been nailed without much if any reaction time this year. He's also held the ball at times. He's also avoided pressure and made plays that other QB's with bad lines couldn't make. We shouldn't discredit JP because he's capable of making a play when the line breaks down.
SilverNRed Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 If you are going to do that, you should also add the attempts & loss of yards from each QBs sacks. And to preempt the argument that sacks are mainly caused by bad OL play, a QBs rushing attepts/yards are increased by a bad OL too. 811599[/snapback] Yardage lost in sacks is already subtracted from the quarterback's total passing yards.
/dev/null Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 so it's first and 10 at our 20 with 2 minutes left in the 4th would you rather have JP in there than any of those you mentioned? me neither with Brady, McNair, Favre, Plummer, & Leftwich there is at least the glimmer of hope. with JP you wonder if he'll fumble, get picked, or sacked on 4th down
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 Yardage lost in sacks is already subtracted from the quarterback's total passing yards. 811603[/snapback] They actually don't include yardage lost to sacks in any statistic for QB's. Look at last weeks box score. The yards for WR's will add up to JP's passing yard total, and his rushing yards will add up to his rushing total. Sacks yards just disappear, even from the overall game stats.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 so it's first and 10 at our 20 with 2 minutes left in the 4th would you rather have JP in there than any of those you mentioned? me neither with Brady, McNair, Favre, Plummer, & Leftwich there is at least the glimmer of hope. with JP you wonder if he'll fumble, get picked, or sacked on 4th down 811606[/snapback] I must have missed the part when I said JP was better then those QB's. Maybe my intent was to show an improving QB who is just now is reaching 16 starts.
/dev/null Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 I must have missed the part when I said JP was better then those QB's. Maybe my intent was to show an improving QB who is just now is reaching 16 starts. 811612[/snapback] ok lemme rephrase. its 1st and 10 at our 20 with 2 minutes left. Do you have confidence JP will lead us for the winning or tieing score, or are you wondering if he'll fumble, get picked, or sacked on 4th down?
Dan Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 They actually don't include yardage lost to sacks in any statistic for QB's. Look at last weeks box score. The yards for WR's will add up to JP's passing yard total, and his rushing yards will add up to his rushing total. Sacks yards just disappear, even from the overall game stats. 811608[/snapback] I thought sack yardage was subtracted from a QBs rushing yards or perhaps the teams total yards. How else do they come up with those stats... the last 3 drives have yielded -10 yards (for example) ? Don't know just pondering.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 ok lemme rephrase.its 1st and 10 at our 20 with 2 minutes left. Do you have confidence JP will lead us for the winning or tieing score, or are you wondering if he'll fumble, get picked, or sacked on 4th down? 811616[/snapback] It really doesn't matter what my answer is because that has nothing to do with the reason for this post. If you must know, I'm not confident he can do that yet. But I do see progress if I don't try and simplify his play into that and that only. It's the equivalent of me asking you if you think the rest of this team is very talented.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 I thought sack yardage was subtracted from a QBs rushing yards or perhaps the teams total yards. How else do they come up with those stats... the last 3 drives have yielded -10 yards (for example) ? Don't know just pondering. 811617[/snapback] Seems I was right and wrong. It's not subtracted from any individual player, but it is subtracted from the overall net yards, and overall net passing yards.
/dev/null Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 It really doesn't matter what my answer is because that has nothing to do with the reason for this post. If you must know, I'm not confident he can do that yet. But I do see progress if I don't try and simplify his play into that and that only. It's the equivalent of me asking you if you think the rest of this team is very talented. 811618[/snapback] True. But your reason for this post was to provide some obscure stat to reinforce your belief that JP is developing into a decent QB I will counter your obscure stat with another. The most accurate QB in Bills history was Rob Johnson. He had a higher career completion percentage than even the immortal Jim Kelly Maybe RJ just wasn't given enough time to develop either?
Dibs Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 Sack yardage lost is not considered lost rushing yards to a QB in the NFL, that’s why it wasn't included. Even if it was I still wouldn't dish out sack yardage to a QB because it is a blend of several things. JP's clearly been nailed without much if any reaction time this year. He's also held the ball at times. He's also avoided pressure and made plays that other QB's with bad lines couldn't make. We shouldn't discredit JP because he's capable of making a play when the line breaks down. 811601[/snapback] I purposefully tried to keep my response general so as not to bring JPL into what I was saying. What I'm saying is a general look at the situation & in no way reflects on JP as an individual performer. The reason I think sacks should be used.... 1. The relative abilities of those around the QB are ignored in all other aspects. A top OL/WRs/RB/TE will all help a QBs yards/attempt. To argue that sacks are caused largly(often) by a lack of OL ability and therefore should be ignored is IMO overtly selective in it's premise. Teams with bad WRs who drop lots of balls & fall to the ground with a nasty look will reduce the QBs ypa as well. There are very few star TEs that can change a game.....we don't discount receptions to TEs due to the disparity. A QB like RJ was notorious for getting sacked. He had a ypa of 7.2(7.1 with his scrambles) Only by adding the sack stats would we see that his actual ypa was far less (5.4). 2. A QB who has good scrambling ability will have an opposite effect with a bad OL. The lack of protection will cause them to run more than a decent OL would do, therefore over-inflating their rushing stats. Again, if we discount the sacks due to bad OL play, we should discount the runs due to bad OL play. Basically I view it that if you are to include a QBs 'ground' abilities, you should include all the ground stats....including sacks.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 True. But your reason for this post was to provide some obscure stat to reinforce your belief that JP is developing into a decent QB I will counter your obscure stat with another. The most accurate QB in Bills history was Rob Johnson. He had a higher career completion percentage than even the immortal Jim Kelly Maybe RJ just wasn't given enough time to develop either? 811621[/snapback] How is this stat obscure? I mean really? A QB can do two things when he drops back, run or pass. The best passers usually don't run as well. The best runners usually don't pass as well. JP's in the middle. Since the NFL doesn't want to include yards rushing in the QB's yards per attempt does it automatically make those yards less important? When JP scrambles for a first down is it not a first down? To me it's more obscure and irrelevant to not include yards a QB rushes for. Yards Per Attempt as a statistic is the most heavily correlated non point related stat to winning % in the NFL. Out of any indivdual player statistic that doesn't involve points it's the most heavily correlated stat to win % in the NFL. You factor in rushing yards as I have, and the correlation is even stronger. Edit* Besides Turnovers Duh
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 I purposefully tried to keep my response general so as not to bring JPL into what I was saying. What I'm saying is a general look at the situation & in no way reflects on JP as an individual performer.The reason I think sacks should be used.... 1. The relative abilities of those around the QB are ignored in all other aspects. A top OL/WRs/RB/TE will all help a QBs yards/attempt. To argue that sacks are caused largly(often) by a lack of OL ability and therefore should be ignored is IMO overtly selective in it's premise. Teams with bad WRs who drop lots of balls & fall to the ground with a nasty look will reduce the QBs ypa as well. There are very few star TEs that can change a game.....we don't discount receptions to TEs due to the disparity. A QB like RJ was notorious for getting sacked. He had a ypa of 7.2(7.1 with his scrambles) Only by adding the sack stats would we see that his actual ypa was far less (5.4). 2. A QB who has good scrambling ability will have an opposite effect with a bad OL. The lack of protection will cause them to run more than a decent OL would do, therefore over-inflating their rushing stats. Again, if we discount the sacks due to bad OL play, we should discount the runs due to bad OL play. Basically I view it that if you are to include a QBs 'ground' abilities, you should include all the ground stats....including sacks. 811622[/snapback] Then Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning are more effective on the ground then JP Losman. You just can't do it that way.
Dibs Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 Then Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning are more effective on the ground then JP Losman. You just can't do it that way. 811626[/snapback] Where did you get that from? ....and again with the JPL thing.....I'm not arguing about him.....I'm discussing the merets of adding in QB rushing stats to the YPA without adding in the sack stats. Theoretically you might have a QB who is an awesome scrambler who can gain tonnes of yards each time he rushes, ala Vick, but has very little to no pass rush awareness, ala RJ. This hypothetical QB would have vastly over-stated stats without adding in his sack stats.....& would be massively benefitted by the dodgy OL that allowed him to scramble his heart out due to OL breakdowns(stats added) & get sacked to the max(stats not added). If a Marino type QB who cannot scramble to save himself but has supreme pocket awareness is hindered greatly without adding the sack stats. The premise for adding the rushing stats is surely to get a more accurate YPA statistic. A general QB run that is negative is called a sack. It makes sense to add all the negative runs as well as all the possitive runs.
Mikie2times Posted October 21, 2006 Author Posted October 21, 2006 Where did you get that from? ....and again with the JPL thing.....I'm not arguing about him.....I'm discussing the merets of adding in QB rushing stats to the YPA without adding in the sack stats. Theoretically you might have a QB who is an awesome scrambler who can gain tonnes of yards each time he rushes, ala Vick, but has very little to no pass rush awareness, ala RJ. This hypothetical QB would have vastly over-stated stats without adding in his sack stats.....& would be massively benefitted by the dodgy OL that allowed him to scramble his heart out due to OL breakdowns(stats added) & get sacked to the max(stats not added). If a Marino type QB who cannot scramble to save himself but has supreme pocket awareness is hindered greatly without adding the sack stats. The premise for adding the rushing stats is surely to get a more accurate YPA statistic. A general QB run that is negative is called a sack. It makes sense to add all the negative runs as well as all the possitive runs. 811634[/snapback] If you adjust sack yards to rush yards then Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning would be better rushers statistically then JP and most of the other scramblers in the league. The reason being they don't take nearly as many sacks. The only other way is to adjust it is from pass yards, and I just don't agree that you should do that. I think it would give you a better picture of teams passing game, but not necessarily a better picture of a players passing game. For example Carson Palmer is under a lot more duress this year then last year, subsequently all his stats have declined dramatically. Taking away the sack yards would only compound things further. If you still hold firm that you should include the stat, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
Nanker Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 True. But your reason for this post was to provide some obscure stat to reinforce your belief that JP is developing into a decent QB I will counter your obscure stat with another. The most accurate QB in Bills history was Rob Johnson. He had a higher career completion percentage than even the immortal Jim Kelly Maybe RJ just wasn't given enough time to develop either? 811621[/snapback] That's why he's in a darkroom somewhere. They're giving him all the time he needs to develop.
Gary M Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 so it's first and 10 at our 20 with 2 minutes left in the 4th would you rather have JP in there than any of those you mentioned? me neither with Brady, McNair, Favre, Plummer, & Leftwich there is at least the glimmer of hope. with JP you wonder if he'll fumble, get picked, or sacked on 4th down 811606[/snapback] Brady is the only one on that list that has less interceptions than JP. And while JP has had 5 fumbles he has only lost 3. So my biggest fear would be a sack, and sacks are only partly the QBs fault, especially if they are on the blind side.
JDG Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 If you combine rushing yards in the yards per attempt statistic for QB's, which you should, JP outranks all these guys this year. I wouldn't exactly say the Bills WR's or OL are more talented then most these teams either. This is what you start to see from a guy who's progressing at QB. The yards per attempt increases, the INT's and TD's also increase. The last stage of the normal progression is for the INT's to level off. 811596[/snapback] A nice thought, but JP Losman has 6.52 yards per passing attempt and 4.1 yards per rushing attempt this year. Thus, including JP Losman's rushing yards should bring his yards per attempt *down.* I think you forgot that when JP Losman takes off and runs, the play is counted as a rushing attempt, not a passing attempt - if you add the rushing yards to his passing yards, then you need to add the rushing attempts to the passing attempts. JDG
.thumb.png.1b7fb4086290c3afc001a7900b31fab0.png)
Recommended Posts