Two Plus Two Newer Archives - Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)

- Sporting Events (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=48)

- - Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=542554)

Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs

For the past two years or so I've gotten in a ton of debates regarding various NFL QBs with the same group of posters here. In an effort to help us both and hopefully both learn something from each other's methods of evaluation I've started this thread. There have been 4 main QBs that we've argued over:

Tom Brady: I think hes better than you guys think he is.

Peyton Manning: I think hes worse than you guys think he is(note: Please don't take this at all to mean that I don't think hes a phenomenal QB. I simply don't think hes quite as great as you guys do).

Mike Vick: I think he was better than you guys think he was.

Vince Young: I think hes is better than you guys think he is.

The crux of our argument seems to be that you guys have a tremendous reliance upon stats imo, while I often advocate using stats as a mere guideline for evaluation. Moreover, I think that often times a QB putting up the best possible stats isn't always the best way to help his team win(although obviously there is a major correlation). I think we can all agree, that the sole job of a QB or any player for that matter is to help his team win as much as possible and that our rankings of them should solely reflect this aspect.

My basic premise:
In many sports, stats give us a very accurate representation of an athlete's ability and value. However I believe that in football, significantly more than any other sport, stats are greatly influenced by a player's surrounding cast and the coaching philosophy and system. In the NFL, stats only tell a part of the story. While some groups(such as football outsiders) have attempted to give us more in depth stats that take some of this into account, I believe that for the most part they greatly fail and the stats are still very much skewed.

Real quickly, let us take a look at the supporting casts of the QBs I mentioned earlier....

Note: I'm real bad at evaluating o-lines. If someone more knowledgeable wants to do that, then I'll step aside and let them add that in.

Peyton Manning: Pretty much a dream situation for a QB. The system allows for heavy use of audibles by the QB and pretty much lets him call whichever play that he wants to. Arguably the 2nd best WR of all time. A great #2 target in Reggie Wayne. Edge was a top 5 pick IIRC and one of the top RBs in the league for year; Addai was a first rounder and has shown a lot of talent so far. Solid TE(probably top 10 in league).

Mike Vick: Ugh....best WR has been...??? I dunno, Peerless Price maybe? Jeez thats bad. Alge Crumpler was a very good TE- never on the Gonzo/Gates level but arguably top 5 and definitely top 10. Dunn, Norwood, Duckett.....meh. I wouldn't ever call that a top 10 group of RBs, maybe not even top 20. System calls for a lot of ball control and not taking chances.

Vince Young: Similar to Vick....just horrible WRs, decent TE, servicable RBs but I don't think anyone would call them top 10 in the league. System is to protect the ball, not make mistakes, and hope the defense can win the game for you.

Tom Brady(before this year): Best WR ever was Troy Brown. Corey Dillon was perhaps a top 10 RB, but A. Smith most definitely was not. Pretty bad all around. System is constantly changing, but overall I'd say its around average for regards to taking chances downfield and opening up the playbook.

Obviously, its no surprise considering my premise that every QB I think is underrated by you guys plays with a poor supporting cast and average/bad system, while the QB I think is overrated by you guys plays with a fabulous supporting cast and in a great system. Thats not a coincidence.

How will we ever be able to solve our dispute??? Well, one way in which we would be able to do it is to see one of these QBs drastically change their supporting cast/offensive system. And thats exactly what happened to Tom Brady this year! He added Moss, Welker, and Stallworth, and his coach went from rather conservative play calling to "running up the score" with reckless abandon.

I don't think I have to tell you the difference it has made in Tom Brady's stats.

Now I have to brag for a bit: I consider this season by Tom Brady to have proven me correct in many ways. Many of you, before this season, were adament that Tom Brady didn't put up great advanced DVOA type stats not because of his lack of cast/system but because he wasn't as good as Manning and he wasn't capable of doing it.

Well I think that we are now left with two options:

Tom Brady greatly improved this offseason
OR
Tom Brady has always been this good. Its just the change in system/cast

I think that if we're honest, nearly all of us would agree that its the latter. So let me ask you this:

Clearly I saw something in Brady before this season that let me know that he was capable of this(I have always called him the greatest QB I've ever seen play). What did I see that you statheads didn't get from your stats? Is it not possible that I also see that same thing in Vick and Young?

I don't ask that question to be a jerk. Rather I'm just trying to point out that its a distinct possibility that your stat-focused approach is causing you to miss out on something.

Now, like I said, the main job of a QB is to win games. And I have always placed a great emphasis on that. However, I have never simply looked at W-L record as a definitive answer. You have never seen me argue for Trent Dilfer as a great QB, argue that Rex Grossman should keep his job, argue that Mark Rypien or Jim McMahon are two great QBs, etc. Please please don't think that I'm blindly looking at W-L records. Rather, what I have always done is to look at how a team performs without a QB. I've posted it before, but I'll go ahead and do it again.....

Tom Brady:
In 2000, the Pats hired Bill Bellicheck who had 1 winning season out of 5 in his previous job with the Browns. They went 5-11 that year. Next year they started 0-2. In the third game, they switched to Brady. The went on the win the SB and start a dynasty.

Mike Vick:
The 2000 Falcons were 4-12. In 2001 he played sparingly(starting 2 games and getting limited action in others) and they went 7-9, 1-1 in the games he started and 6-8 in the games he didn't. He took over in 2002 and they went 9-6-1 and made the playoffs. They won in the first round of the playoffs. Vick got hurt the next preseason...the Falcons went 2-10 without him! He came back and they suddenly went 3-1 to end the season. The next season they went 11-4 with him and 0-1 without him. They made the NFC title game. The next season they went 8-7 with him and 0-1 without him. In 2006 he played every game and they went 7-9. In total, thats 12-32 without him and 36-28-1 with him(not including 2-2 in the playoffs).

Vince Young:
This is a much smaller sample size. The Titans went 4-12 in 2005. In 2006 they started 0-3 without him. He took over and they went 8-5 the rest of the way. In 2007 so far, they are 5-1 with him and 1-1 without him. In total thats 5-16 without him and 13-6 with him.

In short, I don't just look at W-L record, but I look at how a team does with and without a particular QB(keeping in mind how good the backup may or may not be). And with these QBs, it just seems like its either the biggest coincidence in the world or they always seem to do a ton better with them in the lineup. I would understand dismissing this if it were just a few games, but after a while does the evidence not become overwhelming?

BUT ASSANI....CAUSATION DOES NOT EQUAL CORRELATION!!! OMG OMG OMG!!!!!

This is the common reply to when I post these W-L type stats. Either that or some sarcastic "Yes, Vince Young clearly made the defense get a ton better."

Basically what you guys are saying is that we must look at a player's surrounding talent, changes made, etc. before blindly following these numbers. You'll then show me the DVOA or other advanced stats to prove that he really isn't that great.

But do you not see how hypocritical you're being??!!! On one hand, you're saying that while a QB may be the most important position on the field, we cannot give him all the credit/blame for the W-L stat. But then you're raising other stats, and completely ignoring teamates/system! The truth is that all stats(including W-L) are greatly influenced by surrounding talent and system and changes made to the roster and coaching and a ton of other variables.

In the end, this is what makes the NFL so great imo- it leaves open a ton of possible arguments and debates. Rarely in any other sport would we have such drastically different views on the same player. My overall philosophy is that you must look at EVERYTHING, especially actually watching him play, to get a solid feel of a player's value. And I feel as if many of you here follow stats(even the "advanced" stats) way too much. Anyway, I've rambled enough for now, so I'll shut up and listen to some other viewpoints.

100,352.25 and counting