Results 1 to 11 of 11
Thread: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
-
11-12-2019, 12:50 PM #1Rookie Poster
- Join Date
- Mar 2019
- Posts
- 26
Need to re-think the QBR Stat
The original QBR stat, proprietary and owned by ESPN, was launched in 2011. At the timeit was quite useful in the era of QBs that always dropped back, and who were loath to EVER have a designed run. But we are in a new era, where QBs threaten to run, like Mahomes, Watson, Wilson, Prescott and of course, Lamar, and others. QBR does these an injustice as it fails to take account of the runs a QB makes. Passer rating is worse, as it takes no account of running, or game management, but it is an NFL stat so it isn't "owned" by a media company. It was created in the 1970s, and it is definitely not relevant today
We need a revised QBR/passer rating that takes into account designed run yards per attempt, runs on scrambles, rush TDs, etc. For the emerging QBs today, a combined passing/running stat is imperative. Any thoughts out there on this?
-
11-12-2019, 12:53 PM #2Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Location
- New York City
- Posts
- 37,586
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
Why don't we just adapt Einstein's theory :
It's less complicated... Bc
-
11-12-2019, 01:06 PM #3Rookie Poster
- Join Date
- Mar 2019
- Posts
- 26
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
Funny, cuz Wikipedia has the actual computation and it isn't much different looking
-
11-12-2019, 01:28 PM #4
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
Uh, doesn't ESPN's QBR (not to be confused with Passer Rating) take all dropbacks into account? We've had this discussion on here recently. Check JimZipCode's or edromeo's recent posts.
Shared Google Folder with Ravens spreadsheets, nextGen charts, and more! Please share my content! (attribution to Twitter requested)
Knight of the Kingdom of Perfect Play, Student of The Bill James School of Stamping Out Bullshit. Main Sources: PFR, particularly the Play Index; for cap stuff, RSR's Brian McFarland (secondary: OverTheCap, Spotrac)
-
11-12-2019, 01:39 PM #5
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
I look at the QBR "stat" like the PFF "stat". Those are numbers attached to opinions basically.
At least with the passer rating you know that they're taking data that you know, and they combine it all together and spit out a number, and know what they're including and not including. And then could can say that the passer rating is good, as far as it goes, and you know where it goes.
A couple years ago I did a modified passer rating, including runs, rushing yards, sacks and lost sack yardage. And a modified offense rating where runs by not the qb were included. And the results were predictable, running QBs numbers went up, teams that ran a lot, ran well went up.
It really isn't difficult to modify the passer ratings in that way, but no one does it, so it's just not there. Sacks and run losses and 0 yards gains are incomplete, 1+ yards rushing are complete. Lost fumbles = interceptions.
-
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
Didn't you start this exact same thread yesterday or Sunday?
ESPN's QBR DOES take QB runs into effect...as well as situational play impacts.
Characteristics
There are six steps to building QBR:[4]
Each QB "action play" (passes, rushes, sacks, scrambles, or penalties attributable to the QB) is measured in terms of the expected points added (EPA)
Adjust for the difficulty of each play. EPA is adjusted based on the type and depth of a pass, and whether the QB was pressured.
If there is a completion, he only is credited for the typical number of yards after the catch (passer rating takes all yards into effect) based on the type and depth of the pass
There is a discount on garbage time, or a time where the score is out of reach near the end of the game.
Opponent adjustment: More credit is given with tougher defenses and vice versa.
QBR averages the adjusted EPA per play and transforms it to a 0 to 100 scale, with 50 being average.Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
11-12-2019, 02:26 PM #7
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
ESPN's QBR is an useless stat, always has been. It tries to assign a value to "clutch". A recent example is on September 24, 2017, Alex Smith of Kansas City Chiefs received an inexplicable QBR of 7.8, half as much as the equally-bad QBR of 16.1 for his counterpart Philip Rivers of the Los Angeles Chargers, even though Smith had a higher completion rate (16/21 vs. 20/40), a better average per completion (7.8 yds vs. 5.9), a far superior TD/int ratio (2-0 vs. 0-3), and won the game handily 24-10. For comparison, the passer rating, 128.1 for Smith and 37.2 for Rivers, was by far a better metric of success.
The passer rating was never meant to be a "grade" on a QBs total performance, only their passing performance. A new rating system is needed. But it's not ESPN's QBR.Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
11-12-2019, 03:49 PM #8
-
11-12-2019, 06:03 PM #9Four-eyed Raven
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Location
- Balt-Wash corridor
- Posts
- 24,538
-
11-12-2019, 08:51 PM #10Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- College Station, TX
- Posts
- 10,697
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
-
Re: Need to re-think the QBR Stat
Bookmarks