This appears to be an interesting article on predicting QB success in the NFL.
FWIW, Murray came out #1 and Grier came out #2.
It looked at past QB candidates who are in the NFL as well. There are some 'misses' but overall I appreciate the approach to evaluate and predict the performance of these QB candidates in the NFL.
The NFL Is Drafting Quarterbacks All Wrong - (
New Window )
Drew Lock and Tyree Jackson on equal footing with < 1% odds of success in the NFL also looks wonky to me.
I'm also not a huge Lamar Jackson guy at this point - but he's also at the very bottom of his group and is quite literally, a "0" according to them.
Kellen Moore?
I like stuff like this - I find it interesting and always appreciate any different methodology type. But, the conclusions they're arriving at here seem very flawed and I'm not sure I'd be willing to put much stock in any of it.
Not a bad read, though.
But every time I read or hear something positive or negative I get swayed.
Good thing I m not making any decisions.
Now I like Grier too😄
There will never be a perfect statitcal model for football, but what is interesting is if you look at all th published ones, Murray is number 1 in almost all of them. He was 2nd in Ian Wartons. That is somewhat compelling considering running isn’t used except in the PFF model.
I also found it interesting how low Haskins “Depth of target” was. Shows some of the concern that he let his receivers do the work. However, it also potentially shows good decision making, taking what the defense gives., As we have seen as Giants fans....screen passes aren’t always the easiest to throw.
I'm also not a huge Lamar Jackson guy at this point - but he's also at the very bottom of his group and is quite literally, a "0" according to them.
Besides being a great runner, just what makes you or anybody think Lamar Jackson can be a stud NFL QB. He absolutely looks like a "0" at this point. He has the ability, but will it ever translate to the field when it comes to passing? Right now he looks no better than a faster Tim Tebow. I think he needs to change his perspective from him needing to make plays to letting his skill players make the plays. While I don't think he is a great passer he can certainly be average. He looks like his first thought is to run vs pass.
If I can't have either of those options Will Grier at 37 would be an interesting choice.
For example how would Grier have done playing for OSU ?
How would Haskins play if he was at Duke?
Etc.
Football is the ultimate team sport and I find it very difficult if not impossible to predict a QBs pro potential based upon the collegiate stats
The model acknowledges that there are mores misses than hits based upon historic projections for collegiate QBs success in the NFL
Quote:
I'm also not a huge Lamar Jackson guy at this point - but he's also at the very bottom of his group and is quite literally, a "0" according to them.
Besides being a great runner, just what makes you or anybody think Lamar Jackson can be a stud NFL QB. He absolutely looks like a "0" at this point. He has the ability, but will it ever translate to the field when it comes to passing? Right now he looks no better than a faster Tim Tebow. I think he needs to change his perspective from him needing to make plays to letting his skill players make the plays. While I don't think he is a great passer he can certainly be average. He looks like his first thought is to run vs pass.
When did I say I thought he'd be a "stud" QB?
I didn't say that.
He went 6-1 as a starter. He has flaws throwing the football, but I'm not sure how anyone could call him a "0" if he was starting and winning a lot of football games as a rookie. He got them to the playoffs.
He's not a stud - he's also pretty clearly not a zero.
I'd much rather have Jackson than Bortles, McGloin, Seimian, Mettenberger, Geno Smith, Nathan Peterman, Paxton Lynch, Kevin Hogan, Matt Barkley, Kellen Moore, and Johnny Manziel.
All of whom were given higher success probabilities than Jackson based on this model, and half of whom are already out of the league or destined to be career backups.
For people that diss the model.. its not different than any other way of judging.. no matter how you want to look at it nothing will be super accurate hence the idea that the draft is a crap shoot.. so just take the information in..
Should Haskins be penalized for having men open sooner and taking the easy completion in an O that emphasized crossing routes? I do think it is a flag but what that really means is you need to go back and scout his deeper passes and see if they're of a high quality.
What's the argument against Will Grier? Why is he currently not ranked by consensus as a first round prospect?
He went 6-1 as a starter. He has flaws throwing the football, but I'm not sure how anyone could call him a "0" if he was starting and winning a lot of football games as a rookie. He got them to the playoffs.
He's not a stud - he's also pretty clearly not a zero.
He played on a team with a top 3 defense, that is how they won. And the offense was his running with a smattering of passes - he is pretty damn scary in the open field.
As for the players you listed that he is better than - maybe - but I think he will be every bit the bust as a QB as they were. What he will be is a very good RPO QB until the league figures how to defense that. He is not the passer Russ Wilson is, or Kyler Murray. If, and it is a big if, he learns to read defenses better and improves his passing just a bit, yes he will be a good QB. I am not sure he can improve his passing. I'm not sure Josh Allen can improve his passing, and he is a better passer than Jackson.
What's the argument against Will Grier? Why is he currently not ranked by consensus as a first round prospect?
Yeah I would like to see a much wider table. Lauletta, Wentz, Webb, etc. etc.
Let me get my darts out!
Here's what a top 10 should look like (not perfect, but almost all legit QBs):
Rivers - 1964
Palmer - 1916
McNabb - 1799
Mayfield - 1480
Wilson - 1288
P Manning - 1279
Mariota - 1277
Leftwich - 1216
Rodgers - 1216
Big Ben - 1211
Data only goes back to 1997. Obviously Leftwich and Mariota are outliers and it's too soon to tell how good Mayfield will be, but the other 7 are all borderline HOFs (Rivers, Palmer*, McNabb) or HOF locks.
*if not for injuries, he would've been a lock.
Link - ( New Window )
The NFL games I saw Manziel throw in, he had a sweet arm, the guy has great talent, but as we all know his character is a mess. It happens.
Manziel actually flashed legit abilities when he played.
Lock has numerous technical flaws and I'm not enamoured with his 'persona' so I would prefer we didn't go that route. He does have arm talent, athletic ability and size. So there are the raw materials to work with at least.
I don't love YPA because it's often inaccurate and can be misleading. Especially now, where so many passes are being thrown at or near the LOS.
IAY (Intended Air Yards) is a much better measure of how "vertical" a QB really is and how much they're pushing the ball down the field.
By this metric, Eli is actually near the very bottom of the league - behind nearly every other starter.
That said - this number certainly doesn't measure effectiveness and has to be taken with context in mind.
Josh Allen, both TB QB's and Darnold are at the top of this - all of those guys were inconsistent/poor.
On the other hand, Drew Brees is actually just below Eli. Which makes sense - Brees did a lot of getting the ball out quickly.
Average Completed Air Yards (CIA) can provide additional context.
Eli's YPA jumped back up this year due in large part to how good Barkley was at making guys miss. He made something out of nothing on a lot of dump plays. Plays like these weren't going anywhere in 2017.
Quote:
If Yards per attempt is the key stat for a QB, last year was the third best of Eli's career, behind 2011 and 2009. You believe that? I don't.
I don't love YPA because it's often inaccurate and can be misleading. Especially now, where so many passes are being thrown at or near the LOS.
IAY (Intended Air Yards) is a much better measure of how "vertical" a QB really is and how much they're pushing the ball down the field.
By this metric, Eli is actually near the very bottom of the league - behind nearly every other starter.
That said - this number certainly doesn't measure effectiveness and has to be taken with context in mind.
Josh Allen, both TB QB's and Darnold are at the top of this - all of those guys were inconsistent/poor.
On the other hand, Drew Brees is actually just below Eli. Which makes sense - Brees did a lot of getting the ball out quickly.
Average Completed Air Yards (CIA) can provide additional context.
Eli's YPA jumped back up this year due in large part to how good Barkley was at making guys miss. He made something out of nothing on a lot of dump plays. Plays like these weren't going anywhere in 2017.
Yes. But when you have guys like Barkley and Beckham who are legitimate threats to break short passes into big gains, it makes a lot of sense to throw short passes to them a lot. So I don't see measures of how far down the field a QB throws as being all that important in evaluating how well he does. That is a at least as much a measure of the type of offense he is playing in as it is of how well he is doing. The goal, after all, is to get yards nd points, not yards of ball flight. Hitting guys in stride and when their open in the short passing game does reflect on the QB.
- YPA can be very misleading
- IAY/CAY are better measures of where the QB is actually throwing the ball
- Neither metric necessarily measures how effective a QB is or isn't - some players near the top of these metrics weren't very good, some players at or near the bottom were/are very good
One of the NextGen Metrics are aggressiveness - again, not necessarily a measure of good or bad - Eli was just outside the top 5 there. Eli is still Eli in that way - he's not necessarily as risk averse as people may believe. But while the mindset may not have changed all that much, the ability obviously has to at least some degree.
Andrew Luck is the one top flight QB who is right where Eli is here. Rookies find their way high up here (Rosen, Darnold both top 5) - presumably because they're forcing some throws into tight coverages or locking onto one guy. Both TB QB's - their offense was very vertical/very aggressive so these guys were both attacking down the field - which will also lead to a lot of contested balls with defenders there.
A lot of the top flight guys are actually lower in this metric. That can mean different things... it could mean they're making better reads, it could also mean their WR's are better in traffic... it could mean they're playing too safe and are too risk averse. It could be a product of their offense somewhat.
Certain metrics are preferable to others and paint better pictures, but I think in the end, it's always a matter of looking at a bunch of different data, not putting too much stock into any one of them, and using the data to supplement what we see on the field.
- YPA can be very misleading
- IAY/CAY are better measures of where the QB is actually throwing the ball
- Neither metric necessarily measures how effective a QB is or isn't - some players near the top of these metrics weren't very good, some players at or near the bottom were/are very good
One of the NextGen Metrics are aggressiveness - again, not necessarily a measure of good or bad - Eli was just outside the top 5 there. Eli is still Eli in that way - he's not necessarily as risk averse as people may believe. But while the mindset may not have changed all that much, the ability obviously has to at least some degree.
Andrew Luck is the one top flight QB who is right where Eli is here. Rookies find their way high up here (Rosen, Darnold both top 5) - presumably because they're forcing some throws into tight coverages or locking onto one guy. Both TB QB's - their offense was very vertical/very aggressive so these guys were both attacking down the field - which will also lead to a lot of contested balls with defenders there.
A lot of the top flight guys are actually lower in this metric. That can mean different things... it could mean they're making better reads, it could also mean their WR's are better in traffic... it could mean they're playing too safe and are too risk averse. It could be a product of their offense somewhat.
Certain metrics are preferable to others and paint better pictures, but I think in the end, it's always a matter of looking at a bunch of different data, not putting too much stock into any one of them, and using the data to supplement what we see on the field.
I agree with all that. The real problem with any fixed formula for QB effectiveness is that what a QB does is dependent on the receivers, the line, and the scheme in addition to how well the QB does his job. So that any of these formulae are a mix of how well he is playing and what he is asked to do. For example, Eli's YPC took a big jump in 2009--was it because of his play or because we drafted Hakeem Nicks which changed the context for what he was doing?