after hearing a lot about first read% this week i wanted to better understand it. it took me a few days to find a database that tracks the numbers since this isnt something ive seen from the league affiliated sources like nextgen or pff.
i linked the database i found below - advanced passing stats are free to view without an account. i pulled the data from that site into a table of starting QB's ranked by first read % last year and this year, and I added a column to track the delta:
some takeways:
1. not unlike time to throw and some of the other metrics that have been discussed the last few weeks i think the main takeaway is always that numbers are just numbers without context. there is no 1 number that entirely proves 1 simple point. assuming this database is valid it would appear having a very high first read% isnt always a bad thing just like having the quickest time to throw isn't always a bad thing.
2. if certain players are succeeding with high 1st read %'s, it would seem to mean that either that team is calling good plays or they have good players that defenses find it hard to stop.
3. schemes seem to have an impact. example doug pederson's offensive looks very first-read heavy. Lawrence is the only qb 75%+ first read both years, and his rookie year pre-Pederson he was 66.1% which was 28th ranked. Mac Jones and Justin Herbert have seen their firstread% go up and both have new coordinators. i mentioned the shanahan influence around the league yesterday and it looks like a lot of those teams tend to be higher in first read%. purdy, stroud, tua obviously. geno and stafford last year. jordan love this year.
4. personnel probably has some impact - when you throw to tyreek hill or justin jefferson that's probably going to increase your first rate% (and success) - though Tua's first read% was actually even higher in 2021 pre-Hill. stafford was higher last year and id imagine part of that was kupp and part of that was the rams offense evolving.
5. it appears there's a correlation with experienced quality pocket passers using more of their reads with mahomes, stafford, burrow, carr, russell wilson ranking lower in first read %. it would be interesting to see the on/off of QBs numbers to their first read and second+ reads but im not sure that exists anywhere publicly.
last re jones since a lot of this conversation stems from him and i assume many of the replies will too - his first read% was a lot lower than i expected this year, but even more so last year because my priors were that there was a lot of scheming in the giants offense last year. in 2021 his first read% was 70.6% which was 15th by rank and 2021 is as far back as these numbers go so he has never been top half in first read. bringing in the context that he was 1 of the least intercepted qbs over the prior few seasons before this one maybe backs that up, as well as the fact that he is locking in more this year, and has thrown more ints as a result.
since he's in the same offense with the same OC the biggest environmental differences i see are the increased pressure from the OL, playing from behind all season, and not having barkley for half of the season so far. none of that absolves a bad decision like the INT vs seattle but it adds some explanation. the phrases "sped up" and "pressure busts pipes" used to be pretty generally accepted principles - just like kerry collins against baltimore any qb would be having a more difficult time in this year's offensive environment than last years. with less time id imagine there's an instinct to predetermine where you are going pre-play more and that is how you end up with the seattle interception. he didnt see the field because he probably decided where he was going before there was a field to see.
the 100m+ question is how to get things back closer to where they were last year and i think the obvious starting point is finding a way to limit the pressures and not falling behind like they have been, but given the upcoming opponents and thomas/barkley probably still out it seems like it will take a miracle at least this week.
https://data.fantasypoints.com/nfl/tools/player/passing-advanced - (
New Window )
"since he's in the same offense with the same OC the biggest environmental differences i see are the increased pressure from the OL, playing from behind all season, and not having barkley for half of the season so far. none of that absolves a bad decision like the INT vs seattle but it adds some explanation. the phrases "sped up" and "pressure busts pipes" used to be pretty generally accepted principles - just like kerry collins against baltimore any qb would be having a more difficult time in this year's offensive environment than last years. with less time id imagine there's an instinct to predetermine where you are going pre-play more and that is how you end up with the seattle interception. he didnt see the field because he probably decided where he was going before there was a field to see."
I find this to be proof of critical thought. We won't always agree but I will respect your opinions because of it.
I don't think these stats actually highlight what people have been saying. Locking onto your first target and missing downfield throws or taking sacks because of it is not in the OP stats at all. Most of those qbs highlighted look like they make quick throws to their first option. They aren't a relevant way to compare the issue people think Jones has, it's not how often he throws to his first read that is the issue espoused.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
It's not really an inconvenient stat, for either side of the debate.
It's an interesting observation, with data included, and some worthwhile insights from Eric. It doesn't really confirm or debunk anyone's positions on DJ, but it may help inform some opinions and might be worth keeping an eye on going forward to see how that rate moves +/- with the performances that we're watching as fans. Let's say, for example, that DJ has a really productive game against Miami this weekend. Rather than the ensuing back and forth about whether DJ employed more target diversity, we should be able to see what the 1st-target percentage was and have an actual data point to include in the discussion.
Regardless of which side of the DJ debate anyone finds themselves, we all benefit from more informed discussion rather than just using the same criticisms/excuses repeatedly.
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
It may be included on the source page, but I didn't look. How does this rate stat factor for passing plays that do not result in a pass attempt (sack or scramble instead)?
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
Lol. Ok. Gotta tell you as much as I love participating in these Jones takes, I think I need a break.
It s just not computing with me that the guy I watched last season can’t play.
I m also convinced no matter how many things he accomplishes that many here said he would never do, among them, winning a play off game, getting a new contract, or even if he somehow turns this disaster of a season around, we will always be just 1 bad pass away from, “ see I told you he can’t play.
I don’t know why I let I bother me, just dumb on my part. Truth is it does not matter one iota what any of us think of him
I read somewhere else in the myriad of Jones’ threads today, that the sooner we fans come to the realization that he s not the guy, the better.
Why, what difference does it make. He s the guy for now, I looking at what he can do to save this season, done listening to the harping on what he can’t do.
Quote:
In comment 16237158 NorcalNYG said:
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
It may be included on the source page, but I didn't look. How does this rate stat factor for passing plays that do not result in a pass attempt (sack or scramble instead)?
Yeah these stats really don't address the issue many people here see including SY and Jon C.
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
It's not really an inconvenient stat, for either side of the debate.
It's an interesting observation, with data included, and some worthwhile insights from Eric. It doesn't really confirm or debunk anyone's positions on DJ, but it may help inform some opinions and might be worth keeping an eye on going forward to see how that rate moves +/- with the performances that we're watching as fans. Let's say, for example, that DJ has a really productive game against Miami this weekend. Rather than the ensuing back and forth about whether DJ employed more target diversity, we should be able to see what the 1st-target percentage was and have an actual data point to include in the discussion.
Regardless of which side of the DJ debate anyone finds themselves, we all benefit from more informed discussion rather than just using the same criticisms/excuses repeatedly.
i agree with your first sentence - just like time to throw it doesnt really prove much. i think in this case i was a little more surprised by that than time to throw, but that's probably because ive been more familiar with that metric since it's been easier to find with nextgen for the last few years.
i think most people are still underweighting pressure% as the main differentiator. jones is at 47% on the year, so basically as close to 50/50 as it gets snap to snap and a few orders of magnitude higher than some of the least pressured QBs.
the fact that a mediocre at best pass rush like seattle was able to pressure him as much as they did shows a pretty big structural problem. i watched that seattle D get almost 0 pressure on stafford at home week 1 and the Rams OL is not particularly good.
the longer pressure goes unresolved the more i think jones is getting sped up and the worse his decision making is getting.
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
Lol. Ok. Gotta tell you as much as I love participating in these Jones takes, I think I need a break.
It s just not computing with me that the guy I watched last season can’t play.
I m also convinced no matter how many things he accomplishes that many here said he would never do, among them, winning a play off game, getting a new contract, or even if he somehow turns this disaster of a season around, we will always be just 1 bad pass away from, “ see I told you he can’t play.
I don’t know why I let I bother me, just dumb on my part. Truth is it does not matter one iota what any of us think of him
I read somewhere else in the myriad of Jones’ threads today, that the sooner we fans come to the realization that he s not the guy, the better.
Why, what difference does it make. He s the guy for now, I looking at what he can do to save this season, done listening to the harping on what he can’t do.
I love Daniel Jones I really do and I think he could succeed in an ideal situation with a smaller contract number and a stellar team around him. When it comes to the NY Giants I believe the ship has sailed. I don't think he's awful or even bad, it's just not going to work here imo which is an extremely tough realization for me. I'm grieving and mourning what I had hoped for nearly 5 years could work and win us a superbowl.
Quote:
In comment 16237158 NorcalNYG said:
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
It may be included on the source page, but I didn't look. How does this rate stat factor for passing plays that do not result in a pass attempt (sack or scramble instead)?
dont know - they watch and chart their own stuff and one of the sites co-founders was from PFF, but im not familiar with their methodology on that.
Quote:
In comment 16237182 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16237158 NorcalNYG said:
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
It may be included on the source page, but I didn't look. How does this rate stat factor for passing plays that do not result in a pass attempt (sack or scramble instead)?
Yeah these stats really don't address the issue many people here see including SY and Jon C.
a lot of people see things with greater clarity when it confirms their priors.
Quote:
In comment 16237158 NorcalNYG said:
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
Lol. Ok. Gotta tell you as much as I love participating in these Jones takes, I think I need a break.
It s just not computing with me that the guy I watched last season can’t play.
I m also convinced no matter how many things he accomplishes that many here said he would never do, among them, winning a play off game, getting a new contract, or even if he somehow turns this disaster of a season around, we will always be just 1 bad pass away from, “ see I told you he can’t play.
I don’t know why I let I bother me, just dumb on my part. Truth is it does not matter one iota what any of us think of him
I read somewhere else in the myriad of Jones’ threads today, that the sooner we fans come to the realization that he s not the guy, the better.
Why, what difference does it make. He s the guy for now, I looking at what he can do to save this season, done listening to the harping on what he can’t do.
I love Daniel Jones I really do and I think he could succeed in an ideal situation with a smaller contract number and a stellar team around him. When it comes to the NY Giants I believe the ship has sailed. I don't think he's awful or even bad, it's just not going to work here imo which is an extremely tough realization for me. I'm grieving and mourning what I had hoped for nearly 5 years could work and win us a superbowl.
You could be right
Quote:
In comment 16237182 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16237158 NorcalNYG said:
Quote:
In comment 16237155 joeinpa said:
Quote:
To see how this inconvenient stat gets spun.
I just think it isn't valid, the issue isn't how often he throws to first read. The issue is locking onto first read and not seeing other options.
isn't the % of times any qb throws to a 2+ read literally how that qb sees other options?
as mentioned in the op there does seem to be a correlation with the experienced qbs who have had the best field vision over the last decade or so throwing to their non-first options with more frequency.
It may be included on the source page, but I didn't look. How does this rate stat factor for passing plays that do not result in a pass attempt (sack or scramble instead)?
dont know - they watch and chart their own stuff and one of the sites co-founders was from PFF, but im not familiar with their methodology on that.
I think that's an important element specifically in the context of our ongoing DJ debates, particularly given the relative smallness of the 2023 sample size compared to 2022 and how crazy bad the Giants' performances have been. Whether due to OL, QB, scheme or whatever else, DJ has been sacked nearly as often as he's even gotten a pass attempt off, and then when you tack a few more unplanned scrambles into the mix, it's possible that we're not getting an apples-to-apples YOY comparison.
If the first-read lock is truly a thing for DJ (and anecdotally, this POV seems to come up quite often from trustworthy sources as well as from an opponent now too), it's also possible that some of the sacks and/or scrambles were exacerbated by a failure in read/progression by DJ. I'm not saying that they absolutely were caused by that, just curious how the data treats those plays because they clearly end up being different than what was drawn up, but it's often hard to identify in a spreadsheet at what point the play breaks and why.
I def felt like jones would have been higher this year vs last but I would have thought both would have been higher then they were. Ie Both years have a lower 1st read then I expected
An interesting thought on the shanahan offense. He has a reputation for wanting his qb to “obey orders” so to speak. It makes sense that his offense would be have higher 1st read throws. Plus his play design has always been impressive.
Leaving that aside though, I think - as Eric himself did note - that these stats still need greater context. If a QB is in a quick tempo offense that features a lot of short passes that are based on pre-snap reads and synced to footwork and timing, I think that would lead to a high percentage in this stat, and it would be favorable. Compare that to a QB who drops back, sits in the pocket, and never takes his eyes off his one-and-only preferred target - that's going to also lead to a high percentage in this stat, but I would consider it unfavorable.
I feel like this stat will probably be more valuable in a WOW analysis for certain QBs vs. themselves in prior weeks than it will be for comparison vs. other QBs, unless we really get granular with some other related metrics (like time to throw, separation distance, aDOT, etc.) to see if high or low first-read percentages are by design or by flaw.
The hypothesis is:
Daniel Jones does not throw the ball often beyond the first read.
To validate that assumption, you'd need to look at all drop backs and determine the percentage of:
- Throws to the first read
- Throws to the second or later read
- Scrambles after looking to the first read
- Throwaways/spikes after looking to the first read
- Sacks after looking to the first read
Separating out the cohort of drop backs where this is just a throws leaves out a potentially big part of the story.
The hypothesis is:
Daniel Jones does not throw the ball often beyond the first reaConner.
validate that assumption, you'd need to look at all drop backs and determine the percentage of:
- Throws to the first read
- Throws to the second or later read
- Scrambles after looking to the first read
- Throwaways/spikes after looking to the first read
- Sacks after looking to the first read
Separating out the cohort of drop backs where this is just a throws leaves out a potentially big part of the story.
Yeah GD nailed it, you'd have to use a lot of other statistical analysis to see the crux of this issue. Simply looking at first read percentage is invalid for analysis of locking onto first read and missing other options/taking sacks because of that.
Fixing pressure? Start with winning first down. They seem to not have a lot of confidence in the run game with the backs/OL right now though which makes it even harder. The scheme also not been ideal imv. Run game stinking is a very big problem.
Without SB and AT (and state of the OL) and against the wrong D it is going to be tough imv.
Not sure who these credible sources are that said Jones is only a one read QB.
Fixing pressure? Start with winning first down. They seem to not have a lot of confidence in the run game with the backs/OL right now making it harder. The scheme also has not been ideal imv. Run game stinking is a very big problem.
Without SB and AT (and state of the OL) and against the wrong D it is going to be tough imv.
Not sure who these credible sources are that said Jones is only a one read QB.
Fixing pressure? Start with winning first down. They seem to not have a lot of confidence in the run game with the backs/OL right now though which makes it even harder. The scheme also not been ideal imv. Run game stinking is a very big problem.
Without SB and AT (and state of the OL) and against the wrong D it is going to be tough imv.
Not sure who these credible sources are that said Jones is only a one read QB.
Never daring to defense to stop playing only short stuff and stacking the box to play the run and short passes certainly doesn't help the run game. Maybe the coaches see that and bail on the run because it just won't work with our o line and lack of even attempting to make the defense pay for playing only short stuff and runs
Fixing pressure? Start with winning first down. They seem to not have a lot of confidence in the run game with the backs/OL right now making it harder. The scheme also has not been ideal imv. Run game stinking is a very big problem.
Without SB and AT (and state of the OL) and against the wrong D it is going to be tough imv.
Not sure who these credible sources are that said Jones is only a one read QB.
It does not need to be a credible source to get parroted with great authority, it just has to feel good
A funny thing is that "throws to his first read" has a negative connotation attached, but in reality it might just be a great design, called at the right time, and / or good execution by the receiver.
The other side of the coin would be if defenses are sitting on the first read, then the play call is too predictable.
Either way, nobody is doing their job well right now, and i agree that they need to run the ball a lot more. Even if they don't want to be a run first offense, that may be the best way to be competitive. Chew clock, make a short ugly game and try to make a play or 2 and steal it late
Quote:
but not sure how relevant without a lot of other information. Allen/Jones being very close is interesting considering they run the same offense.
Fixing pressure? Start with winning first down. They seem to not have a lot of confidence in the run game with the backs/OL right now making it harder. The scheme also has not been ideal imv. Run game stinking is a very big problem.
Without SB and AT (and state of the OL) and against the wrong D it is going to be tough imv.
Not sure who these credible sources are that said Jones is only a one read QB.
It does not need to be a credible source to get parroted with great authority, it just has to feel good
A funny thing is that "throws to his first read" has a negative connotation attached, but in reality it might just be a great design, called at the right time, and / or good execution by the receiver.
The other side of the coin would be if defenses are sitting on the first read, then the play call is too predictable.
Either way, nobody is doing their job well right now, and i agree that they need to run the ball a lot more. Even if they don't want to be a run first offense, that may be the best way to be competitive. Chew clock, make a short ugly game and try to make a play or 2 and steal it late
Sy, Jon C, former nfl qbs, opposing defenses, I'm hearing this locks onto first target thing a lot. No one is saying the problem is simply throwing to first target, they are saying he lacks the quick mind and field vision thus locks onto first target and it compounds all the problems on offense.
Ehhh, I don't know that they need to know the first read before the snap. They can play it straight up and DJ will telegraph his first read right away. At least that's how I'm interpreting that suggestion; not so much that defenses can accurately predict who the first read will be based on formation or personnel.
When Witherspoon said that they knew on tape that DJ stared down his first read and didn't come off it, he didn't say they knew the playbook. He just said that DJ's positioning and eyes would tell them where he was going to go with the ball.
I think it was Bobby Skinner but it might have been @DoABarrowRoll on Twitter - I saw it pointed out in one of the all-22 breakdowns of Monday night that DJ's helmet stripe never so much as changes its angle while the pick 6 is developing. That's the indictment, not the route concepts (in this particular case, anyway).
Quote:
The other side of the coin would be if defenses are sitting on the first read, then the play call is too predictable.
Ehhh, I don't know that they need to know the first read before the snap. They can play it straight up and DJ will telegraph his first read right away. At least that's how I'm interpreting that suggestion; not so much that defenses can accurately predict who the first read will be based on formation or personnel.
When Witherspoon said that they knew on tape that DJ stared down his first read and didn't come off it, he didn't say they knew the playbook. He just said that DJ's positioning and eyes would tell them where he was going to go with the ball.
I think it was Bobby Skinner but it might have been @DoABarrowRoll on Twitter - I saw it pointed out in one of the all-22 breakdowns of Monday night that DJ's helmet stripe never so much as changes its angle while the pick 6 is developing. That's the indictment, not the route concepts (in this particular case, anyway).
100%
I think stats can be helpful, but only secondarily to what you see and/or know. The QB’s listed are all over the place in terms of first read percentage and the general consensus of how good they are.
The question really becomes- how do you assess QB’s and what place (if any) do stats have in that analysis? One ‘stat’ no one ever seems to mention much is wins and losses - now that is a stat I pay attention to more than a lot of others. Maybe we need the football equivalent of baseball’s WAR if we want to move towards a more meaningful stat-based assessment. Anyway, interesting post by Eric on Li.
Football is the ultimate team sport and things are intertwined with coaching, team health, between units and on all 3 sides of the ball. It’s interesting to look at different stats but it doesn’t help if you don’t watch and understand the game. Sound bites and fantasy points move the needle. Qbs get outsized portions of money, credit and blame. It’s a simplified way of viewing things but then again it’s nice to think you’re one player away. Haha
Quote:
What a lot of social experts have been saying.
I don't think these stats actually highlight what people have been saying. Locking onto your first target and missing downfield throws or taking sacks because of it is not in the OP stats at all. Most of those qbs highlighted look like they make quick throws to their first option. They aren't a relevant way to compare the issue people think Jones has, it's not how often he throws to his first read that is the issue espoused.
It does, somewhat, tamp down the notion that DJ doesn't go thru progressions. As for missing open receivers, I suspect having multiple people chasing after you is distracting and limits your vision.
Quote:
In comment 16237143 JT039 said:
Quote:
What a lot of social experts have been saying.
I don't think these stats actually highlight what people have been saying. Locking onto your first target and missing downfield throws or taking sacks because of it is not in the OP stats at all. Most of those qbs highlighted look like they make quick throws to their first option. They aren't a relevant way to compare the issue people think Jones has, it's not how often he throws to his first read that is the issue espoused.
It does, somewhat, tamp down the notion that DJ doesn't go thru progressions. As for missing open receivers, I suspect having multiple people chasing after you is distracting and limits your vision.
It doesn't do anything like that for the reasons discussed.
Enjoy your confirmation bias.
Giving it a quick glance across a few sites that 120 looks to be 2nd most to Fields last year.
So assuming that 60% first read number is on the 450 number it's 270 attempts at his first read, and 120 unaccounted for plays.
No way to know how many of those Jones couldn't get beyond the first read.