ncr2h Posted January 4, 2014 Author Share Posted January 4, 2014 This. The thing I pointed out in the initial analysis of this was that it makes the assumption that 38 is some magical number. What we all know is that most coaches play a style of football where they run the ball late when they have leads, and are more likely to throw late when they're down, particularly down by 9+ points in the 4th quarter. This leads to a bias in the samples where we're looking at (like you mention) teams that either (1) are already pass heavy teams, or (2) are down by a lot of points late. And when you're down by 9+ points late, you're already more likely to lose. So really the question becomes whether or not these QBs were able to lead game winning drives late (which we heard so much about with Luck), but that's completely independent of the number 38. So I would question first how many of these QBs had a 1500 yard rusher on their roster that they could depend on. That's unlikely for the reason you state, that many of these teams are rebuilding teams and the QBs are generally the first piece of a rebuild. But that biases the stats. The other thing is, just look at the stats. I'd define a blowout as losing by 9+ points because that requires at least two scores and means that its impossible to come back with a single play. He seems to say that being down by 9+ points with 2 minutes to go is such a bad thing, but that's acting as if the last two minutes don't count. So I'd look at the final score to determine my blowouts. 2012: RG3 vs Carolina: 23/39, 215 yards, final score 21-13 Carolina (so we lost by 8 points, not a blowout) 2013: RG3 vs Philly I: 30/49, 329 yards, final score 33-27 Philly (so we lost by 6 points, not a blowout) RG3 vs GB: 26/40, 320 yards, final score 38-20 GB (so we lost by 18 points, I'd call this a blowout). RG3 vs Det: 32/50, 326 yards, final score 27-20 Det (so we lost by 7 points, not a blowout) RG3 vs Dal: 19/39, 246 yards, final score 31-16 Dal (So we lost by 15 points, I'd call this a blowout). (so two blowouts and 3 close games). But why 38? Why not 35? 2012: RG3 vs Tam, 36/35, 323 yards, final score 24-22 Skins (so we won one) RG3 vs Min: 24/37, 281 yards, final score 34-27 Min (so we lost by 7, not a blowout) RG3 vs Philly II: 17/35, 264 yards, final score 24-16 Philly (so we lost by 8, not a blowout) (In this case we get 1 win, and two close games). Why not keep looking and say 30? 2012: RG3 vs Cin, 21/34, 221 yards, final score 38-31 Cincy (so we lost by 7, not a blowout). Rg3 vs Pit, 16/34, 177 yards, final score 27-12 Pit (we lost by 15, i'd call this a blowout). 2013: RG3 vs Oak, 18/31, 227 yards, final score 24-14 Washington (so we win again) RG3 vs Den, 15/30, 132 yards, final score 45-21 Denver (so we lost by 24, a blowout) RG3 vs SDG, 23/32, 291 yards, final score 30-24 Washington (so we win again). RG3 vs NYG, 24/32, 207 yards, final score 24-17 Giants (so we lost by 7, not a blowout). (in this case, we get 2 wins, 2 close games, and 2 blowouts). I can keep going on and on by this and what you'll see is a general trend in QBs, the more they have to pass the ball, the less likely they are to win games. This is not just with RG3 or young QBs, its with all QBs. Its one of the reasons that teams like to establish the run, and run the ball late. Sure that's old school football, but it also speaks to the risks involved in completing a pass. And just for comparison's sake, lets look at a HOF QB, Troy Aikman, whose name just popped into my mind as I was typing this post. In his first year, 1 game with 38+ pass attempts @PHO, L 20-24, 21/40, 52.50%, 379 yards, 2 TD, 2 INT In his second year, 3 games with 38+ pass attempts @WAS, L 15-19, 23/43, 53.49%, 207 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT PHI, L 20-21, 22/41, 53.66%, 233 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT @NYJ, L 9-24, 25/40, 62.50%, 249 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT And since the comparable to Aikman (and RG3) is always Young, why don't I include him as well? In his first year, no games with 38+ pass attempts. In his second year, 1 game with 38+ pass attempts: CHI, L 3-23, 22/43, 51.16%, 220 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT Joe Montana: year 1, no 38+ games Year 2, 1 such game: @ATL, L 10-35, 25/41, 60.98%, 222 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT Hmmm, whats that mean about these guys, particularly Young who by my definition of a blowout? Young was blown out in "every single game where he threw 38+ passes". Does that make him a bust? I will never understand the need to lower the bar for RG3, when he is supposedly a franchise QB. If you don't like the term "blown out", then use "highly likely to be unwinnable". I see no reason to hand RG3 his goodie bag at the end of the game for scoring a touchdown or field goal with 2:00 or less left when we are down by 2 scores. I am using the same criteria for all QBs, so if RG3 is elite he should look better than them. I think if you kept going on with your lowering of the bar to 35, and then to 30, is that you'd find that RG3 has a disturbingly game manager-esque tendency to lose an inordinate amount of games when he is asked to throw even a measly 30 passes. He was 1-3 when doing so last year and 2-8 while doing so this year, for an overall winning percentage of 21%. I think you'd find that, while all QBs tend to be less successful the more they are required to throw, the elite QBs are still fairly successful when throwing 30 or 35 times per game, while the game managers and scrub QBs struggle when their teams lean on them to win games. The 38+ metric was a nice cutoff that, when you look at all the recent data on QBs, shows a trend. As for Aikman and Young, that's ancient history. My data went back to 2002. If you need to reach back to the 90s to find precedent for RG3 being elite, I think that's a red flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Can you show some correlation between number of comeback victories per season and elite QBs, as I demonstrated in the OP? All elite QBs since the year 2002, with the possible exception of Rivers (the possibility being whether or not you consider him elite), had 3+ wins with 38+ passes in their first two seasons as a starter. I'm not sure why you would accept your own analysis, since it doesn't appear to show any pattern whatsoever, but I would be open to further analysis on this issue. I don't know that one exists. Just like you don't know that one exists based on your biased assumption. I'm not here to draw correlations. You stated a hypothesis that I disagree with so I stated examples of how was who have similar numbers to the in their first 2 years. If you think my assumption is false then is on you. But I'm more confident in using comeback victories than the 38+ number which I and elk have already stated has a flawed logic applied to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 I will never understand the need to lower the bar for RG3, when he is supposedly a franchise QB. If you don't like the term "blown out", then use "highly likely to be unwinnable". I see no reason to hand RG3 his goodie bag at the end of the game for scoring a touchdown or field goal with 2:00 or less left when we are down by 2 scores. I am using the same criteria for all QBs, so if RG3 is elite he should look better than them. I think if you kept going on with your lowering of the bar to 35, and then to 30, is that you'd find that RG3 has a disturbingly game manager-esque tendency to lose an inordinate amount of games when he is asked to throw even a measly 30 passes. He was 1-3 when doing so last year and 2-8 while doing so this year, for an overall winning percentage of 21%. I think you'd find that, while all QBs tend to be less successful the more they are required to throw, the elite QBs are still fairly successful when throwing 30 or 35 times per game, while the game managers and scrub QBs struggle when their teams lean on them to win games. The 38+ metric was a nice cutoff that, when you look at all the recent data on QBs, shows a trend. As for Aikman and Young, that's ancient history. My data went back to 2002. If you need to reach back to the 90s to find precedent for RG3 being elite, I think that's a red flag. The quarterback position has existed since Sammy Baugh invented forward pass. Did QBs suddenly start throwing 38 passes in 2002? Your use on 2002 till now was because you could only find stats for your blowout metric going back to then. My definition of blowout allows me to use profootballreference.com. And since what you stated was a conjecture independent of rg3, it should apply to any qb in any time period. So my job is to search for the counter example that didn't fit. I knew that Aikman has Emmett, like rg3 has Morris. So I assumed they'd have similar numbers. The fact that Aikman didn't fit your hypothesis doesn't mean that Aikman's not a hof qb. It means your metric is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_e_b Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Some guys that most people would have considered elite that DID NOT meet your criteria. Troy Aikman 12-Nov @ PHO L 20-24 1 -- 21 40 23-Sep @ WAS L 15-19 1 -- 23 43 28-Oct PHI L 20-21 1 -- 22 41 4-Nov @ NYJ L 9-24 1 -- 25 40 Warren Moon 9-Sep IND L 21-35 1 -- 23 43 8-Dec NYG L 14-35 1 -- 26 47 15-Dec @ CLE L 21-28 1 -- 22 48 22-Dec @ IND L 16-34 1 -- 22 40 Steve Young 9-Nov CHI L 3-23 1 -- 22 43 Joe Montana 14-Dec @ ATL L 10-35 1 -- 25 41 *Now some quick cherry picks of guys that DID meet your criteria Elvis Grbac 20-Nov @ MIA W 44-20 1 1 31 41 Ty Detmer 27-Oct CAR W 20-9 1 1 23 38 Trent Dilfer 10-Dec GB W 13-10 1 1 23 42 Gus Frerotte 22-Oct DET W 36-30 1 1 21 39 Jeff Blake 6-Nov @ SEA W 20-17 1 1 31 43 24-Dec PHI W 33-30 1 1 17 42 Tony Banks 11/30 @ WAS W 23-20 1 1 19 38 12/07 @ NO W 34-27 1 1 22 41 Steve Bono 12/01 NO W 38-24 1 1 27 41 12/08 @ SEA W 24-22 1 1 25 44 Jim Harbaugh 12/02 DET W 23-17 1 -- 23 39 I'm sure all of us are very disappointed that Robert Griffin's chances of being the next Grbac, Detmer, Dilfer, or Frerotte are much lower now since he couldn't manage to throw for an arbitrary 38 passes or more in a winning game. By the way, I took less than 10 minutes coming up with all these examples. I plan on adding more whenever I feel like doing some more cherry-picking. I'd imagine this list will get pretty damn long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncr2h Posted January 4, 2014 Author Share Posted January 4, 2014 The quarterback position has existed since Sammy Baugh invented forward pass. Did QBs suddenly start throwing 38 passes in 2002? Your use on 2002 till now was because you could only find stats for your blowout metric going back to then. My definition of blowout allows me to use profootballreference.com. And since what you stated was a conjecture independent of rg3, it should apply to any qb in any time period. So my job is to search for the counter example that didn't fit. I knew that Aikman has Emmett, like rg3 has Morris. So I assumed they'd have similar numbers. The fact that Aikman didn't fit your hypothesis doesn't mean that Aikman's not a hof qb. It means your metric is wrong. In my opinion, the role of the QB has fundamentally changed since Troy Aikman and Steve Young were rookies, back in the mid 80s. But if you feel that those 2 examples are enough, that's your decision. Some guys that most people would have considered elite that DID NOT meet your criteria. Troy Aikman 12-Nov @ PHO L 20-24 1 -- 21 40 23-Sep @ WAS L 15-19 1 -- 23 43 28-Oct PHI L 20-21 1 -- 22 41 4-Nov @ NYJ L 9-24 1 -- 25 40 Warren Moon 9-Sep IND L 21-35 1 -- 23 43 8-Dec NYG L 14-35 1 -- 26 47 15-Dec @ CLE L 21-28 1 -- 22 48 22-Dec @ IND L 16-34 1 -- 22 40 Steve Young 9-Nov CHI L 3-23 1 -- 22 43 Joe Montana 14-Dec @ ATL L 10-35 1 -- 25 41 *Now some quick cherry picks of guys that DID meet your criteria Elvis Grbac 20-Nov @ MIA W 44-20 1 1 31 41 Ty Detmer 27-Oct CAR W 20-9 1 1 23 38 Trent Dilfer 10-Dec GB W 13-10 1 1 23 42 Gus Ferotte 22-Oct DET W 36-30 1 1 21 39 By the way, I took less than 10 minutes coming up with all these examples. I plan on adding more whenever I feel like doing some more cherrypicking. I'd imagine this list will get pretty damn long. ...it shows. Please re-read the OP and try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jericho Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 This is a bizarre post and the number 38 seems completely arbitray. But I think the simple answer here is that the Redskins have never asked Griffin to throw the ball a bunch. If the game is close, then the pass attempts are down. Once a game gets out of hand, then the pass attempts come out. But this remains an issue of cause and effect. Asking Griffin to throw 38+ times isn't causing the team to be blown out, its when the team is being blown out causes Griffin to throw more often. The reality is we don't know what kind of QB Griffin will become if asked to elie on his arm. A guy like Big Ben , who was not asked to do much in his first couple seasons, might be a reasonable comparison. But whether RGIII develops like Big Ben (or better or worse) is an unknown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 This thread appears to have go on too long for me to really jump in so I'm just going to give my thoughts and leave. It's silly to compare RGIII's success/failures in throwing 38+ passes when he's really played a single healthy season and a second at partial health on a run first team. Players like Mark Bulger, Matt Stafford, Andrew Luck, Aaron Rodgers, Kurt Warner, etc. (just to give a range of current/alumni) played in pass first systems. RGIII clearly played in a run first offense built around his own running ability and that of Alfred Morris. The only reason we would ever throw 38+ passes is because we're being blown out. Mike/Kyle were never going to call 38+ passes because we're winning a game. It doesn't play to the strength of our team. Not just RGIII but the team. We have an OL that excels (if you can call it that) at run blocking but struggles pass blocking. We have an elite RB that excels on cutback runs but struggles in the passing game. A QB with running ability of his own and average WR's with above average run blocking ability. Why would we be throwing 38+ passes again? Oh yeah, because we're getting blown out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Look at the garbage he would throw these passes too. This line can't protect RG3. Besides Garcon and Reed who came on late in the year, even if those 2 were targeted 20 times, who would get the other 18? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_e_b Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 ...it shows. Shows how ridiculous this "metric" is? . . . of the guys I listed, only Bank, Frerotte, and Dilfer are listed in the OP. There are far too many examples that disprove any semblance of correlation between this "metric" and quarterback success. Perhaps it is you that needs to try again to find some arbitrary number that works a little more often than this at "predicting" elite quarterbacks. The fact that the guys I listed not only met your metric, but did so in a time where the NFL was less pass friendly must mean that guys like Jeff Blake and Steve Bono were world-beaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncr2h Posted January 4, 2014 Author Share Posted January 4, 2014 Shows how ridiculous this "metric" is? . . . of the guys I listed, only Bank, Frerotte, and Dilfer are listed in the OP. There are far too many examples that disprove any semblance of correlation between this "metric" and quarterback success. Perhaps it is you that needs to try again to find some arbitrary number that works a little more often than this at "predicting" elite quarterbacks. The fact that the guys I listed not only met your metric, but did so in a time where the NFL was less pass friendly must mean that guys like Jeff Blake and Steve Bono were world-beaters. I'm sorry man, but my time is limited. I won't be responding to you any more until you can demonstrate an understanding of the OP. The OP shows that all elite QBs since 2002 had at least 3 wins with 38+ passes in their first 2 seasons. Having only 1 such win is a bust indicator. 2 such wins indicates competency. 0 such wins indicates either a good game manager (McNair, Ben), a bad game manager (Campbell), or a horrible QB. Please re-read the OP and don't just rely on the brief summary I've given here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncr2h Posted January 4, 2014 Author Share Posted January 4, 2014 This thread appears to have go on too long for me to really jump in so I'm just going to give my thoughts and leave. It's silly to compare RGIII's success/failures in throwing 38+ passes when he's really played a single healthy season and a second at partial health on a run first team. Players like Mark Bulger, Matt Stafford, Andrew Luck, Aaron Rodgers, Kurt Warner, etc. (just to give a range of current/alumni) played in pass first systems. RGIII clearly played in a run first offense built around his own running ability and that of Alfred Morris. The only reason we would ever throw 38+ passes is because we're being blown out. Mike/Kyle were never going to call 38+ passes because we're winning a game. It doesn't play to the strength of our team. Not just RGIII but the team. We have an OL that excels (if you can call it that) at run blocking but struggles pass blocking. We have an elite RB that excels on cutback runs but struggles in the passing game. A QB with running ability of his own and average WR's with above average run blocking ability. Why would we be throwing 38+ passes again? Oh yeah, because we're getting blown out. That's funny, because Cousins wasn't getting blown out against Cleveland last year, yet had 37 passes. The final pass-run ratio for the game is distorted by us killing the clock on our final drive. Before that, we were up by 2 TDs and still chucking it around like nobody's business. We weren't getting blown out against Atlanta or Dallas, either. Against Atlanta, Cousins threw 45 passes and overcame 4 non-Cousins turnovers to have our team in a position to win the game at the end. He didn't, and he should have, but it's a fact that we had more of a chance to win at the end of the Atlanta game than we did against Minnesota or NYG (Griffin's game), which are typically put forth as his best performances this year. Against Dallas we were in position to win the game until Romo sits to pee converted 2 4th and 10s in the final 4 minutes of the game. Sure, Cousins could have done a much better job on his final drives but he had already done enough to put us in the lead until the final moments of the game. So the actual truth, as has been stated in this thread, is that when RG3 is our QB we are a run-first team. When Cousins is our QB, we are a pass first team. In my opinion, this is because the coaches are afraid to rely on RG3's arm to win them games, whereas with Cousins there is a higher level of trust. That's an opinion, not a fact. But the fact that we pass more with Cousins, regardless of the score, is indisputable. Which rules out the "run first philosophy" excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qdeathstar Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Interesting research, i still think griffin has what it takes, but its hard to ignore that there are exactly zero elite quarterbacks in the same category as griffin. I think loosing the entire off season along with the typical sophomore slump business and a paper bag defense made this season what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 But the fact that we pass more with Cousins, regardless of the score, is indisputable. Which rules out the "run first philosophy" excuse. That in no way rules out the "run first philosophy." Part of the team's production running the ball comes from RGIII carrying the ball. Another portion of that is the threat of him running and the way that opens holes for Morris/Helu. Those aspects don't exist with Cousins, hence a different game plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truskinsfan18 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Regardless if you agree with the OP or not, you can't dispute that his research shows a TREND. Yes it could consider other variables but there is definitely a trend shown in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdskn4eva Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 RG3 has one GREAT year and one sub par year and now it's already time to have open comp in camp. Cousins hasn't shown me anything to make me believe he is better than RG3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.