Comparing Flacco to the other playoff QBs left (Merged Threads)

[52decleetzu]

Where you getting 70? I see no 70. And 80.9 is this year's rating for Flacco (not 86). You trying to claim that Joe was getting ripped for playing like he did his rookie (or even 2nd year)? No chance. It is the flatline or downtrend that is producing the criticism (same was the case with Eli even at a lower rating). It is the postseason underperformance as well that has resulted in some criticism.

Let me try this again.

http://blogs.baltimoreravens.com/201...g-playoff-qbs/

Eli's career rating first 4 years 70.6

Flacco's career rating first 4 years. 86.0

The difference between a QB with an 86 rating(using 2011) is the QB with the 70.6 rating would be 31st, and the QB with the 86 rating would be 13th. They ARE NOT close. The 31st rated QB is viewed terrible, the 13th is pretty good. Would you agree? I sure as hell hope so.

You said it "wasn't that much difference", as you conveniently used Flacco's (almost) WORST, down year rating for ONE year compared to a much larger sample size of 4 YEARS that is much more reliable to determine anything.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/...26/eli-manning

When Manning finished with an 85 rating in 2010, after he finished with a 93 in 2009, was that an outlier or just the natural variance in any statistical trend? You sound like you know the answer to that, while arguing otherwise.

The bottom line is Flacco is light years ahead of Eli Manning at similar points in their career, and that is indisputable. If past events tendto predict future ones, considering the improvement Manning(and every other "elite" QB) made after year 4 Flacco has a bright, ELITE future ahead of him. He is ahead of the curve, not behind it like some would have you to believe. And that "curve" is in reference to the best of the best, not just an average QB.

[Haloti92]

Let me try this again.

http://blogs.baltimoreravens.com/201...g-playoff-qbs/

Eli's career rating first 4 years 70.6

Flacco's career rating first 4 years. 86.0

The difference between a QB with an 86 rating(using 2011) is the QB with the 70.6 rating would be 31st, and the QB with the 86 rating would be 13th. They ARE NOT close. The 31st rated QB is viewed terrible, the 13th is pretty good. Would you agree? I sure as hell hope so.

You said it "wasn't that much difference", as you conveniently used Flacco's (almost) WORST, down year rating for ONE year compared to a much larger sample size of 4 YEARS that is much more reliable to determine anything.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/...26/eli-manning

When Manning finished with an 85 rating in 2010, after he finished with a 93 in 2009, was that an outlier or just the natural variance in any statistical trend? You sound like you know the answer to that, while arguing otherwise.

The bottom line is Flacco is light years ahead of Eli Manning at similar points in their career, and that is indisputable. If past events tendto predict future ones, considering the improvement Manning(and every other "elite" QB) made after year 4 Flacco has a bright, ELITE future ahead of him. He is ahead of the curve, not behind it like some would have you to believe. And that "curve" is in reference to the best of the best, not just an average QB.

Eli in his first 4 years was: 987/1805 for 11,385 and 77 TDs and 64 Ints = 73.4 rating (according to my calc). It also includes the clearly substandard half season he came off the bench as a rookie (and doesn't include the first half of his 5th season to even up the starts). Check the blogger's math, seems bushu to me.

As for outliers, that is exactly the issue. Is 2011 an outlier for Joe? Will his 5th year reverse the trend?

Comparing QB ratings from 4-8 years ago (or yardage stats or TDs) to today's stats is a complete fallacy, as passing stats are easier to come by these days.

As for light years ahead, as I said and you keep ignoring, Joe needs to improve a good deal from here on out (starting Sunday) or he quickly falls behind.

EDIT: On a hunch I tried simply calculating the mean of the 1st four years of Eli's QB rating and it came up as 70.55, lol. So the blogger simply has no idea what he is doing by averaging them like that when each year has different weightings (due to vastly different number of attempts). The guy is a clown.

[The Excellector]

Part of why Eli caught so much heat is, because of the power play move he made when he was drafted.

[Haloti92]

I agree, though I think his dad was calling the shots on that power play. Plus as 52d said, he was taken at #1 overall. Plus he played below average for years. Plus his brother was kicking ass (at least in regular season) by year 2. And obviously he is in the biggest media market.

[52decleetzu]

Eli in his first 4 years was: 987/1805 for 11,385 and 77 TDs and 64 Ints = 73.4 rating (according to my calc).

Ok the blogger is an idiot if he just averaged out the final numbers, I was just too lazy to do the math myself. I should have known better to take anything the media writes as fact but I assumed he could do 3rd grade math and google "qb rating calculator".

It also includes the clearly substandard half season he came off the bench as a rookie (and doesn't include the first half of his 5th season to even up the starts). Check the blogger's math, seems bushu to me.

Why do you keep making statements like this?? Flacco played his rookie year too, coming from Division 1-AA and only coming in when injury forced him to. Eli had an advantage sitting back and watching for half the year. No idea why you think this should be some sort of asterick next to the numbers. they are what they are, and Eli had an advantage in a huge way over Flacco sitting back and watching. The 55 rating is what it is.

As for outliers, that is exactly the issue. Is 2011 an outlier for Joe? Will his 5th year reverse the trend?

The evidence would suggest the Flacco's career path is going the way of the elite QB's playing today, as he bests or is just as good as pretty much every single one through 4 years.

Comparing QB ratings from 4-8 years ago (or yardage stats or TDs) to today's stats is a complete fallacy, as passing stats are easier to come by these days.

OK we will use 73.4, and we will use 2007 numbers. matter of fact I will list a bunch of years since Eli was drafted as it takes 3 seconds to look up.

In 2004 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 15th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 30th.

In 2005 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 13th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 25th.

In 2006 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 15th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 30th.

In 2007 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 14th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 26th.

In 2008 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 16th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 29th.

Are we getting the point here? 86 - Good. 73 - Bad.

As for light years ahead, as I said and you keep ignoring, Joe needs to improve a good deal from here on out (starting Sunday) or he quickly falls behind.

Falling behind what? A 3 game blip in the playoffs at year 4 over a 65 game sample size?

If Joe Flacco played at an 86 rating clip for the next 4 years his career numbers would be better than the numbers Eli had after 8. If he improves a "good deal" he will be an elite QB and one of the best in the league.

Eli Manning's career QB rating......a robust 82. After 4 years of pretty good play on the back end. That should tell you how bad the first 4 years were.

[bacchys]

Why do you keep making statements like this?? Flacco played his rookie year too, coming from Division 1-AA and only coming in when injury forced him to. Eli had an advantage sitting back and watching for half the year. No idea why you think this should be some sort of asterick next to the numbers. they are what they are, and Eli had an advantage in a huge way over Flacco sitting back and watching. The 55 rating is what it is.

Not to mention Eli had Kurt Warner to talk to on the sideline, a Super Bowl winning veteran, instead of Troy Smith who didn't have many years or starts under his belt, either.

[Haloti92]

Why do you keep making statements like this?? Flacco played his rookie year too, coming from Division 1-AA and only coming in when injury forced him to. Eli had an advantage sitting back and watching for half the year. No idea why you think this should be some sort of asterick next to the numbers. they are what they are, and Eli had an advantage in a huge way over Flacco sitting back and watching. The 55 rating is what it is.

I make statements like that because while it might help to watch from the bench, it helps more to actually start and get in game experience. Flacco's first start he was at a disadvantage compared to Eli's first start, but after some time, it becomes reversed in that Flacco's 64th start he should look better than Eli's 55th start. If you are arguing about future potential then you might as well just use the ages of the QBs only. Brady's first year he had 3 attempts, not starts, 3 frickin attempts. Are you going to actually argue that after that year he would be more prepared to start a year 2 than Flacco who had 16 games under his belt? That is why I mentioned it. It is what it is alright.

The evidence would suggest the Flacco's career path is going the way of the elite QB's playing today, as he bests or is just as good as pretty much every single one through 4 years.



OK we will use 73.4, and we will use 2007 numbers. matter of fact I will list a bunch of years since Eli was drafted as it takes 3 seconds to look up.

In 2004 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 15th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 30th.

In 2005 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 13th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 25th.

In 2006 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 15th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 30th.

In 2007 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 14th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 26th.

In 2008 a QB with a rating of 86 would be ranked 16th, and a QB with a rating of 73.4 would be ranked 29th.

Are we getting the point here? 86 - Good. 73 - Bad.

You keep using averages, after you have been told we are talking about the trend. Why did you waste so much time typing all that for nothing? When did Eli's QB rating drop 13 points from one year to the next? Year 3 to 4 like Flacco? Earlier? I couldn't find it. In year 4 regular season, I think Flacco's rating ranks 18 (too lazy to re-look but close). Eli's year 4 regular season rating was like 25ish. A difference but not Good vs Bad. Sorry.

Falling behind what? A 3 game blip in the playoffs at year 4 over a 65 game sample size?
If Joe Flacco played at an 86 rating clip for the next 4 years his career numbers would be better than the numbers Eli had after 8. If he improves a "good deal" he will be an elite QB and one of the best in the league.

Eli Manning's career QB rating......a robust 82. After 4 years of pretty good play on the back end. That should tell you how bad the first 4 years were.

Falling behind the progress. Year 1-4 is irrelevant when you are judging the quality of a QB in year 5. A QB who puts up Ratings of 86 for 8 straight years is worse at year 8, than a QB who puts up Ratings of 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, despite the fact the latter averages to 82.5 Rating.

The "3 game blip in playoffs" is actually larger than 3 games and not even close to a blip. Flacco has a postseason QB rating through the first 4 years (in 8 games), including last weeks effort, of 66.2. Eli through 4 years had a rating of 84.1 (in 6 games). If 86 is Good and 73 is Bad (per you). Then 84 is Good and 66 is Pathetic. And if Flacco goes 22 for 30 for 300 yards 3 TDs and 0 Ints this weekend he raises his postseason rating to 75.1 (Bad still, per you).

If you want a QB that rarely performs in big games but can throw low to mid 20s TDs, low to mid 10s Ints, low to mid 3000s yards every season to bank his mid-80s QB rating, then fine, but I would prefer a guy that methodically marches towards having reliable big game outings, throws for high 20s to 30 TDs, mid 10s Ints, 4k+ yards, and a 90+ rating.

The fact is, Eli flipped a switch from year 4 to 5 after contributing significantly to winning the SB at the end of year 4. He then improved again in year 6. If Joe keeps putting up carbon copies of the average if his first 4 years, regular season and postseason, without any progress, then you will slowly become part of a shrinking minority of people defending Joe.

Joe absolutely has done well for his first 4 years. The sky is clearly the limit. But carbon copies of these 4 years forever (if we have seen the ceiling) isn't going to cut it. Certainly in terms of postseason performance but also even the regular season performance.

Lastly, to repeat myself ad nauseum, people are concerned about this year, this year, this year, in that it 'apparently' was a big step backwards from last year. (though even I admit there are mitigating factors to the stat regression)

[52decleetzu]

Few more for ya...

Eli comp % first 4 years - 54.6%. Never had a year above 57.7%. 6.3 yds per attempt.

Flacco comp % first 4 years - 60.9%. Never had a year below 57.6%. 7.06 yds per attempt.

These are big differences any way you slice it.

I mean I appreciate the challenge and love the debate, but I know this stuff like the back of my hand, I have spent countless hours researching it. If I had my damn laptop fixed I could show you a spreadsheet with Flacco vs every other elite QB that I did after last year and how he compares favorably. The arc of a QB's career is different than any other position due to it's complexity, and even the great ones don't really "get it" until about 5 years in. There are some exceptions but they are few and far between.

But against Manning it really isn't a fair fight to be honest with you, because the numbers really aren't close no matter how you want to spin them. He was in the right place at the right time to win a Superbowl, that is about the only thing he has on him. How much of that was him and how much was luck? Well we could debate that forever. If David Tyree doesn't make the catch of his life we aren't even having this debate right now.

I will also hold fast to the idea that teams win Super bowls, not QB's when you have a 45 man roster on gameday. Entirely too much praise, and too much blame is given to one man out of 45 even though he touches the ball on every offensive play. Remember on about half of those plays he just turns around and hands it off, and lets the 6 guys on the Oline and the 2 backs do the rest.

[Haloti92]

Few more for ya...

Eli comp % first 4 years - 54.6%. Never had a year above 57.7%. 6.3 yds per attempt.

Flacco comp % first 4 years - 60.9%. Never had a year below 57.6%. 7.06 yds per attempt.

These are big differences any way you slice it.

I mean I appreciate the challenge and love the debate, but I know this stuff like the back of my hand, I have spent countless hours researching it. If I had my damn laptop fixed I could show you a spreadsheet with Flacco vs every other elite QB that I did after last year and how he compares favorably. The arc of a QB's career is different than any other position due to it's complexity, and even the great ones don't really "get it" until about 5 years in. There are some exceptions but they are few and far between.

But against Manning it really isn't a fair fight to be honest with you, because the numbers really aren't close no matter how you want to spin them. He was in the right place at the right time to win a Superbowl, that is about the only thing he has on him. How much of that was him and how much was luck? Well we could debate that forever. If David Tyree doesn't make the catch of his life we aren't even having this debate right now.

I will also hold fast to the idea that teams win Super bowls, not QB's when you have a 45 man roster on gameday. Entirely too much praise, and too much blame is given to one man out of 45 even though he touches the ball on every offensive play. Remember on about half of those plays he just turns around and hands it off, and lets the 6 guys on the Oline and the 2 backs do the rest.

The first 4 year differences are significant, what you just showed me is the same as the average QB rating, which I already addressed. What Eli didn't do anywhere was drop 5% off his comp. percentage from any year to the next.

Yeah teams win SuperBowls, but QB rating refers to the QB. And Flacco has an abysmal QB rating in the playoffs compared to Eli. It has nothing to do with Tyree, nor did I even attempt to rub in the 1-0 ring advantage after 4 years (mostly because Flacco still has a very real shot to match it). I mentioned QB rating over a statistically significant number of postseason games. I understand why you are ignoring that because it isn't close to a fair fight; Good vs Pathetic.

Nothing in your latest post addresses the issue, which is that Flacco is ahead year 4 to year 4 (but he was more ahead year 3 to year 3), but he will not stay ahead unless he improves from here. He went backwards from last year to this year so obviously 'improvement' is not some kind of automatic assumption (if it were we wouldn't be talking, or at least I wouldn't).

But it was fun to raise our post counts. I am shooting for Veteran status. :D