Physical/mental Traits Of Qb's Made Visual For Us.

[RaminExile]

So I'm throwing the football about in the yard, thinking about how unfair life is that I got really small hands. Yeah, they're good for certain stuff (Im sure my girlfriend agrees) but for piano playing and playing Quarterback I'm just not built for it.

So I started thinking, how important is it really? Everyone talked about how Daunte Culpepper had small hands and would be a bust because of it. Well he had an ok career. A quick google search brought up this little gem. Its one guy's interpretation of Quarterbacks traits that can be garnered from things like the combine drawn in a visual way.

My first reading of it seems to suggest that it appears to be a pretty accurate way of predicting whether a QB has got it or not. Have a look and tell me what you guys think of it. Its quite fun!

Andrew Luck is a freak according to it. It also looks like Colin Kaepernick is better than RGME according to this. Bear in mind it was drawn up in August 2013 - but as its based on stats from the combine you could replicate it anytime with anyone you want!

http://nflphilosophy.com/a-visual-representation-of-nfl-quarterbacks/

P.S. Apologies if its already been posted but I haven't seen it before.

 

[V3]

Interesting link but I'm not sure I see what it's showing. I get what it's trying to show but I'm not sure it succeeded in its goal. Seems to be pretty inconsistent(some small "webs" for truly great players and some fairly big "webs" for mediocre-to-bad players) and doesn't even take into account accuracy or arm strength. The biggest thing that stood out to me was how low Wilson's Wonderlic score was and also how he got a 0 for height.

 

[RaminExile]

Well I think the problem with it is that it doesn't weight any of the categories. For some people, a QB's height is not really an issue. For others it is. Wilson scores a 0 for height because its measured as a percentile against the other quarterbacks he was competing against (this for when he was at Wisconsin).

Still. I think there are some interesting things shown here. Its like a more objective "eye test". You can predict for example, that Tannehill is going to be a decent, but not elite pocket quarterback - whilst Weeden was going to be below average. Or that EJ Manuel was a much better prospect than Geno Smith based purely on this type of analysis.

I often wonder if this stuff is more important than the "intangibles" that ex pros seem so set on. I view these intangibles with some suspicion simply because they cant be measured and so cannot be disproven. For me, that takes away some of their weight.

The items measured in the link are arguably subjective (i.e. Wilson being given a 0 for height), but as I say - these aren't figures plucked out of the ether - they are measured against other QBs.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Interesting charts. I like this kind of stuff.

Curious why some of the attributes change between players? For example, hand size is not on every spider diagram.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Interesting charts. I like this kind of stuff.

Curious why some of the attributes change between players? For example, hand size is not on every spider diagram.

Manipulation of representation?