New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)

- Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)

- - How to Evaluate a QB (https://blackandgold.com/saints/6254-how-evaluate-qb.html)

How to Evaluate a QB

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...hitlock/041021

Quote:

These guys get overrated because most QB evaluators rely too heavily on statistics. I hate stats. What you see on the scoreboard and what you see on the field is the only way to evaluate a quarterback. We know Brady dominates on the scoreboard -- the Patriots haven't lost in a year. What you might not realize is how impressive Brady is on the field, and that's because the NFL hasn't developed a way to track the one defining stat for a quarterback:

Y.A.C., which stands for (passing) yards after contact.

Football is a contact sport, and no quarterback in the league handles contact as smoothly and courageously as Brady does. That's what separates Brady from Manning and everyone else playing the position.

Brady is the exact same quarterback after he absorbs a sack or hit as he is before the contact. You can't say that about Manning or many other QBs. Why do you think Brady has led two game-winning drives in the Super Bowl? Because getting dinged doesn't bother him. He never gets happy feet. It's difficult to force him into a hurried read.

The book on defending Manning is to hit him in the mouth early in the game and then watch him melt. Manning isn't a wimp; he just doesn't shake off contact as effectively as Brady. Manning, like most quarterbacks, hears footsteps. Brady, in this context, is deaf.

His willingness to stand in the pocket and absorb a hit is why New England's adequate receiving corps and (until this year) mediocre running game have produced enough points to win two Super Bowls and 20 straight games. If Brady had Indianapolis' personnel, he'd go stat for stat with Manning, and there would be no debate.

As a favor to you, I've taken the time to rank the NFL quarterbacks from one to 15. Stats don't count. Brady, of course, is No. 1. Feel free to print out this list, take it to work and shut up your co-workers.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not sure if this opinion posted at ESPN's page 2 is too inflammatory, but I thought he had an interesting argument on judging your QB based on how well he does after he gets hit. He goes ahead and rates the top 15 in the league.

08, what do you think about the guy's thesis?

[Edited on 22/10/2004 by BrooksMustGo]

How to Evaluate a QB

Personally, I think the using YAC is not a valid stat to judge a QB. You could have to equally good QBs yet one has WRs who are better at getting YAC and that wil skew the ranking.

The author is dead on about hearing footsteps though. Unfortunately, there\'s no way to see that through stats so it is just as subjective as telling me which QB is more handsome.

Many of us have spent time here trying to develop a true formula using game stats that would help us decide who are the best QBs in the game. I think one key stat is yards per completion. This stat eliminates other players mistakes (such as drops) to a large degree. Of course, it\'s only one of many that need to be used in such a formula, but again I think it is key.

How to Evaluate a QB

ScottyRo,

Not to call you out but in this article YAC is yards after contact for the qb, meaning can he still make a play after contact in the pocket or a sack and not yards after catch for the wide receiver. Just thought i\'d clarify.

How to Evaluate a QB

Quote:

Not to call you out but in this article YAC is yards after contact for the qb, meaning can he still make a play after contact in the pocket or a sack and not yards after catch for the wide receiver. Just thought i\'d clarify.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Yes, the impression I was getting is that some QB\'s are good until they get hit. The guy who wrote the article rates Brady #1 in the league because he\'s the same guy no matter how often he gets hit. He never hears footsteps, he never hurries his reads and he never bails out of the pocket too early. He doesn\'t care if you hit him, because he\'s determined to beat you. I guess he\'s to QBs like Hines Ward is to WRs. Ward like going across the middle. If he gets hammered, he gets up laughing since he just got a first down.

Anyway, I thought it was an interesting thesis.

How to Evaluate a QB

Well, ok, I guess I miss read it. And that would be another good stat to use in the QB formula, but as the author said it\'s not kept up with by the NFL or tracked well by the NFL.

I assume, BMG, that you posted this because you feel that Brooks is woeful in that category. I can\'t say that I disagree, but I can\'t agree either. That\'s because we never really get a chance to see if some contact alters AB\'s mindset since -especially this season- he seems to be running for his life from the start. He has looked hurried many times this season, but I think it\'s because of the sheer amount of pressure rather than the actual contact.

How to Evaluate a QB

Quote:

I assume, BMG, that you posted this because you feel that Brooks is woeful in that category. I can\'t say that I disagree, but I can\'t agree either.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Actually I just thought it was interesting. I was thinking more about the way he reviewed Peyton Manning. Manning might be the one QB in the league you can really disrupt with the blitz. It does seem that hitting Manning early and often takes him out of his game.

As for Brooks, I thought it was interesting that he didn\'t make the list, but I would like to see the author\'s take on him. The only knock I have on Brooks, related to this article, is that he tends to back out of his protection. I can\'t account for why he does this, but it has been a common issue throughout his career.