Register All Albums FAQ Community Experience
Go Back   New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

Finding a cure for insufficient statistics

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; NFL needs a better measuring stick for quarterbacks, and players at other positions too By RON POLLACK, Editor-in-chief I’ve got passer ratings on my mind. You know, the complicated formula to rate passers that can only be figured out if ...

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 04-09-2005, 01:57 PM   #1
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
Finding a cure for insufficient statistics

NFL needs a better measuring stick for quarterbacks, and players at other positions too

By RON POLLACK, Editor-in-chief

I’ve got passer ratings on my mind. You know, the complicated formula to rate passers that can only be figured out if you have a Univac 9000 computer or by those who possess a Ph.D in mathematics.

Broken down as simply as possible, passer ratings are based on four categories: percentage of touchdown passes per attempt, percentage of completions per attempt, percentage of interceptions per attempt and average yards gained per attempt.

The final results are the passer ratings. Not quarterback ratings. The system acknowledges that it does not factor in leadership, play-calling and other very pertinent qualities that make a quarterback successful. Given this, I find it peculiar that the passer rating is the statistic that is used as the measuring stick for quarterbacks. For the most part, passer ratings are what most people look at when they try to decide who the best quarterbacks in the NFL are and who deserves to go to the Pro Bowl.

Why? I find it folly to allow this rating system to be the be-all and end-all for quarterbacks when it merely lists Johnny Unitas, arguably the best quarterback in the history of the game, 38th on its all-time list. Neil Lomax, on the other hand is ranked 10th all-time. Neil Lomax?

Now, you can argue that this merely proves that the passer rating rewards the style of play of more modern quarterbacks rather than the way the game was played in a previous era. This doesn’t hold up, though, since Jeff George is ranked 29th all-time, while Phil Simms is ranked 36th. Both played in the same era. George is all arm without the nuances that make for a great quarterback. Simms may not have been a golden-armed quarterback, but he personified all the subtleties of the position that make for a winning quarterback. Yet George ranks higher. Something is wrong.

It seems to me that, as complicated as the passer-rating system is, it is not complicated enough. I would argue that it does not look at enough statistics. The following are additional statistics that I think should be added to the passer-rating system to give us a quarterback-rating system that gives an even better idea of who is a top quarterback:
# Percentage of passes completed for a first down on third-down pass plays. After all, the ability to convert on third downs is what makes a successful quarterback.

# Fourth-quarter passing statistics should be weighted more heavily than those from the first three quarters, since, after all, the fourth quarter is when big-time quarterbacks deliver and frauds shrink from the moment. The one potential flaw in this statistic is that a quarterback on a dominant team may not play a lot in the fourth quarter of some games, but it’s not like he’ll have bad stats in this quarter, so I don’t think he would be hurt by this.

# I think a quarterback should get points in the quarterback rating for leading scoring drives in the final two minutes of each half. The longer the drive at the end of the half, the more his quarterback rating should benefit.

# Touchdowns thrown when the score is close should carry more weight than those thrown at the time of a blowout. This will place less emphasis on touchdowns thrown in garbage time against backup defensive players.
Other positions

As long as I am on the subject of ways to make statistics more pertinent, let’s take a look at other positions:

Receivers — I’ve never understood why the number of catches is what defines the best receivers. It should be yardage. We don’t declare the rushing champion to be the guy with the most carries, so why is the receiving champ the guy with the most catches? It makes no sense to me. If you want to go one step further and develop a receiver ratings system, the categories I would include are total yardage, TD catches, number of catches for a first down, number of catches for a first down on third-down plays and yardage after the catch. Plus, points should be deducted for each dropped pass, although I admit that the subjectivity of determining a drop vs. a broken-up pass might be too difficult at times, making this category unwieldy.

Defensive linemen — I’ve never understood why sacks are the measuring stick at this position. If a guy has one good play a game that results in a sack but is otherwise completely dominated by his opponent, he will still have 16 sacks and be hailed as a great player even though he got his own team killed. My DL ratings system would include sacks, QB hurries, total tackles, fumbles forced and fumbles recovered.

Defensive backs — Interceptions are the popular statistic, but they are a lot like quarterback sacks. If a defensive back picks off one pass every other game but is otherwise getting torched by receivers, he will still be among the league leaders in interceptions. My DB ratings system would include interceptions, passes defensed, tackles and percentage of passes the player they defend catches per overall pass attempt. I would weight the last category especially heavily since it will reward star players such as Deion Sanders who totally shut down their man yet do not show up on the stats sheet much since their is no stat for shutting out a receiver.

Running backs — I think this position is fine, since, above all else, what really matters is rushing yardage. Yeah, yeah, pass receiving and blocking are nice, but star running backs are almost always made on rushing yardage alone. I have no problem with running backs being rated solely on their rushing yards.

Linebackers — This is a tough one since some linebackers’ job is to stop the run, some linebackers’ job is to rush the passer and some linebackers’ job is to drop back in coverage. I’m not sure there is a one-size-fits-all rating system for this position. To do so would have to include an inordinate number of stats to factor all of these types of responsibilities into the equation. I’m not sure you’d want to do this because some defensive schemes don’t want an outside linebacker to rush the passer, while others don’t ask the OLB to drop into pass coverage a lot. I see no point in penalizing a player who doesn’t do one of these things if he is not asked to do so by his defensive scheme.

Offensive linemen — This is a position that is not conducive to statistics. Even if you tried to credit individual linemen for rushing yardage on plays that are run over them or penalize them for allowing sacks (both of which would be very difficult to compute), you have problems. Which offensive lineman do you credit with the yards on one of Terrell Davis’ patented cut-back runs? Which offensive lineman do you credit with yards when Barry Sanders does one of his superhuman, reverse-the-field, Houdini-type runs? Plus, why should a lineman be penalized for a sack allowed when the quarterback holds on to the ball too long or when another lineman gets beaten and causes the quarterback to get flushed into another lineman’s man?

http://archive.profootballweekly.com...ily_031599.asp

[Edited on 9/4/2005 by GumboBC]
GumboBC is offline  
 


Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts