"Arjun Menon
@arjunmenon100
Introducing QB Wins over Expected. Using a QB's supporting cast (rushing, oline, receiving, defense, ST), we can apply regression analysis and find that since 2019 no QB has elevated their roster to more wins over expected than Patrick Mahomes"
Link - (
New Window )
I think the point of this is it's trying to control for the supporting cast.
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
DJ throws a needle through two defenders for Engram to drop, washed up Tate having a meltdown on the sideline and the Young Jokester throwing haymakers at opponents.
The whole point of this metric is to adjust the rating based on the QB's surrounding cast. Daniel Jones would have much fewer expected wins than Patrick Mahomes based on surrounding cast. Wins over/under expected is then the baseline you can compare.
I am sure many here will hate it because it is math, and many here will think it is gospel because it is math. Most reasonable people will consider it a useful data point.
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
"No idea"....sure, sure, whatever helps you get through your day.
Mediocre in high school. Mediocre in college. Bad as a pro. GoSh We HaVe No IdEa WhAt He iS!!!
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
No, you have no idea what he is. Most people who have watched the Giants for the past three years have a good idea of what he is.
Link - ( New Window )
The thread title was very clear. You clicked on the thread and added a comment just to let everyone know you don't approve of the thread's existence?
Thanks?
Interesting to see that right before Mahomes was drafted, Cincinnati drafted our very own John Ross.
A huge QB gaffe that they were able to recover from by getting Burrow a few years later.
Wow.
with such a strong O-Line that Daniel Jones has not won more games.
I say simply amazing.
Mara has already spoken to Jones a few times just to call him a special boy.
Sometimes you have to use common sense (analytics don’t).
If NY doesn’t get screwed by the refs vs Washington, Jones would have been 5-5 up to the game his season ended. The team was an abomination after that. THAT should tell you FAR more than these “wins over expected type stats” which are STILL interpretation of statistics by humans. That plus a quarter won’t get you a cup of coffee.
Mara has already spoken to Jones a few times just to call him a special boy.
And then he gave him a Werther’s Original.
Quote:
the coddling today.
Mara has already spoken to Jones a few times just to call him a special boy.
And then he gave him a Werther’s Original.
Damn, I'm 33 and my mom still won't let me have those
Quote:
And win. The roster should be better this year, so go win games.
The whole point of this metric is to adjust the rating based on the QB's surrounding cast. Daniel Jones would have much fewer expected wins than Patrick Mahomes based on surrounding cast. Wins over/under expected is then the baseline you can compare.
I am sure many here will hate it because it is math, and many here will think it is gospel because it is math. Most reasonable people will consider it a useful data point.
The problem is it's math that then incorporates the "designer's" personal opinions. How does he or she quantify the skill of the people around the QB. That's personal opinion. And then the conclusion is his or her personal conjecture based on those earlier opinions. OPS is math. Wins above replacement is subjective use of math. Big difference.
Quote:
the coddling today.
Mara has already spoken to Jones a few times just to call him a special boy.
And then he gave him a Werther’s Original.
I actually laughed at this one. Well done... lol
Sometimes you have to use common sense (analytics don’t).
So trying to judge whether a QB is good by analyzing his surrounding cast isn't common sense? But bitching about a refs call is, what? In depth analysis? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
but but but Troy Aikman likes him so that's good enough for some bbi'ers top 5 QB
I have misgivings about the methodology for evaluating surrounding cast. But if this method is sound we really aren’t seeing what we think we’re seeing.
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
No idea what you see, but I have a pretty damn good idea what we have in Jones.
Also - I know we don't like the Cowboys, but they have Drew Lock over Dak Prescott.
Give us other reasons for believing he's the worst. There may be an abundance of them.
Give us other reasons for believing he's the worst. There may be an abundance of them.
Wins above replacement or war is a rock solid approach for team sports. The implementation here may or may not be effective but your dismissal of the approach out of hand says more of your ignorance of the state of the art of sabermetrics than it does about the approach itself. If it works in baseball it can work for football.
Quote:
but any stat that measures QB success where the numerator in the ratio is wins is a highly dubious stat, imo. They want you to believe the denominator resolves the team aspect of winning, but in the end WINS is not a QB statistic, nor should it be.
Give us other reasons for believing he's the worst. There may be an abundance of them.
Wins above replacement or war is a rock solid approach for team sports. The implementation here may or may not be effective but your dismissal of the approach out of hand says more of your ignorance of the state of the art of sabermetrics than it does about the approach itself. If it works in baseball it can work for football.
LOL, okay.
For what it's worth I am not a statistician, but I'm a mathematician with a pretty good idea of the statistical approach taken here.
I feel much more confident in my ability to critique a statistical measure than I do in critiquing a quarterback's play.
But you're right, I'm probably just an ignoramus when it comes to these things. I'm certain I don't know what all the experts on seem to know.
Quote:
Nope clicked on it for its usual entertainment value.
.
The thread title was very clear. You clicked on the thread and added a comment just to let everyone know you don't approve of the thread's existence?
Thanks?
Quote:
we have no idea what he is.
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
"No idea"....sure, sure, whatever helps you get through your day.
Mediocre in high school. Mediocre in college. Bad as a pro. GoSh We HaVe No IdEa WhAt He iS!!!
No QB would be remotely successful with the factors he's had to deal with. None.
But we had a natural experiment to see what the team did when he went down and it sucked ass.
You could argue that put in the “totally average QB” instead of our backup we’d have done better but a) they aren’t available and b) it’s a hypothetical construct.
We’ll find out what we need to know if Taylor beats him out.
Not enough data points.
Which is why the PFF WAR uses PFF grades and no one uses it.
Unless you have a known expert putting their name on it, we cannot verify that it's BS or garbage. Sorry John. Now pipe down.
Quote:
.
The thread title was very clear. You clicked on the thread and added a comment just to let everyone know you don't approve of the thread's existence?
Thanks?
Nope clicked on it to learn something and for the entertainment value. I wasn't disappointed. Not sure why it would bother you.
Quote:
In comment 15718079 Blue21 said:
Quote:
.
The thread title was very clear. You clicked on the thread and added a comment just to let everyone know you don't approve of the thread's existence?
Thanks?
Nope clicked on it to learn something and for the entertainment value. I wasn't disappointed. Not sure why it would bother you.
I'm pretty sure it's you who is very clearly bothered by the thread.
Don't expect more entertainment value than you provide.
Quote:
In comment 15718062 NYG22 said:
Quote:
we have no idea what he is.
Let's just take the year and evaluate, hopefully without:
-zero running game
-poor, oft- injured weapons
-worst OL in football
-a 1980s playbook
"No idea"....sure, sure, whatever helps you get through your day.
Mediocre in high school. Mediocre in college. Bad as a pro. GoSh We HaVe No IdEa WhAt He iS!!!
No QB would be remotely successful with the factors he's had to deal with. None.
And the factors DJ seemingly needs to be successful are the same ones that you would ideally surround a rookie QB with, at a much lower price tag.
Whether it's DJ's fault or not is irrelevant. The reality is, his price tag is very likely to go up next season. The Giants wasted his rookie contract. And in the early stages of yet another rebuilding effort, they're probably better off syncing the timeline to a new rookie QB deal unless DJ somehow demonstrates genuine All-Pro level performance this year.