bluecoconuts
Legend
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,073
Jared Goff
- Thread starter STLRam
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Soul Surfer
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 6,634
- Name
- Charles Mazyck
Sometimes being too big is a drawback.
Think of the old term; "The bigger they are the harder they fall".
Thinner/wirey guys are also more flexible overall.
Just generally being able to go with the flow of the hit rather than standing there and taking the force of the hit.
Just a general philosophy and not written in stone.
But Wentz's style is what got him injured this last time as he forced himself in between 2 immovable objects
Getting crushed between them in the process.
Not the way I wanted the Wentz versus Goff round one to end.
LACHAMP46
A snazzy title
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,735
Yall made me jump up to look this over....and Utah has a DL we need to check out too...
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17653521/how-total-qbr-calculated-explain-our-improved-qb-rating
The intent of Total QBR is to isolate each NFL quarterback's contribution to his team's fortunes as accurately as possible with the data available. It measures nearly every aspect of quarterback play, from passing to designed runs to scrambles to turnovers to penalties. QBR also strives to separate the performance of the individual quarterback from the rest of his team, all in an effort to rate the overall efficiency of each quarterback in the league.
Several factors can paint a picture of how well a QB is playing, but until now, the opposing defense's strength hasn't been part of the Total QBR equation. ESPN's new metrics change that.
One thing it hasn't done, however, is to account for the strength of the 11 players on the other side of the line of scrimmage.
But now, QBR accounts for opposing defenses: Quarterbacks who face tougher defenses will have their ratings adjusted upward in proportion to the difficulty of their opposition, and those who face weaker defenses will have their ratings adjusted downward. This is one more step toward gaining a true measure of overall quarterback performance -- and a big step.
Here's how the opponent adjustment works. Early in the season, we don't have enough information on how good each defense truly is. It usually takes several weeks of data to have a reasonable estimate of how tough each defense is. So the adjustment starts with an estimate for each defense, which is based on a model of how defensive performance varies from one season to the next. Then, as each week is played, we update that estimate with performance information from each game. The result is an accurate and relatively stable estimate of how tough each defense is for a quarterback to face. Several weeks into the season, the effect of the early estimate becomes very small, and by the end of the season it is virtually nonexistent.
Next, we compute an adjustment to each quarterback's performance based on those estimates of how tough each defense is. We also factor in home-field advantage. It's no surprise that quarterbacks playing at home tend to have an easier time than those playing on the road. These adjustments are made underneath the hood of QBR -- on each quarterback's share of his team's expected points added (EPA) per play, which factors in nearly all aspects of quarterback play, including passes, scrambles, designed runs, sacks, turnovers and even some penalties. Those EPA rates are also adjusted to correct for performance in "garbage time," when the game's outcome has effectively been decided.
Lastly, those adjusted EPA rates are scaled to produce the final opponent-adjusted QBR, which is a number from 0 to 100. This scale can be thought of as a percentile of game-level performance -- 50 is average and a 99 would be among the best games on record. Quarterbacks don't often get below a QBR of 5 (they'll get benched by that point). On a season level, a QBR of 75 or higher would be elite performance, and 25 would be considered replacement-level performance.
Early in the season, the opponent adjustment will have the most impact since many quarterbacks have faced an imbalanced set of opposing defenses. Some examples will help explain how the adjustments affect the ratings.
Through Week 3 in 2016, Ryan Tannehill's unadjusted raw QBR of 53.0 suggests he has been playing at a league-average level. But his adjusted QBR of 62.2 is significantly higher, highlighting how difficult his opponents have been so far. The Dolphins have faced the Seahawks and Patriots, both on the road, plus the Browns, whose defense so far has been middle of the pack.
Drew Brees exemplifies the opposite. Through Monday night, his opponent-adjusted QBR is 52.7, lower than his unadjusted raw QBR of 57.5. His Saints have faced the Raiders, Giants and Falcons, all three in the bottom-third of the league in terms of defensive QBR allowed, with two of three games at home.
By the end of the season, most starting quarterbacks have faced an evenly balanced set of opponents, so their adjusted and unadjusted QBRs will be very close. But there are exceptions, and those are the interesting cases. For example, in 2015, one reason the Panthers were able to finish the regular season 15-1 was that they faced a disproportionate number of weaker defenses. The difference between Cam Newton's unadjusted raw QBR of 70.3 and his adjusted QBR of 65.1 (retroactively calculated) reflects the relative weakness of his opponents.
On the game level, the adjustments are usually more stark. Matt Ryan's recent Monday night game at New Orleans was among the week's best performances with a raw QBR of 92.4. But because the Saints' defense is among the league's easiest for quarterbacks to face, Ryan's opponent-adjusted QBR for that game falls to 87.8.
Jacoby Brissett, the Patriots' rookie fill-in, had a storybook debut against the Houston Texans, who have one of the league's most formidable defenses. His raw QBR for the game was 62.1, but after opponent adjustment, it becomes 70.7. The highest-rated game since 2006, when QBR began, is a 99.8 by Colin Kaepernick in the 49ers' 42-10 win against the Jaguars in 2013.
Jacksonville's defense was near average that season, so Kaepernick's raw and adjusted QBR are the same. Kaepernick was 10-for-16 with a TD and no interceptions, but this is where QBR and the traditional passer rating diverge. Kaepernick absorbed no sacks, never fumbled, rushed for 54 yards on seven carries, and added two rushing TDs. Remember that QBR is a measure of efficiency, rather than total production, and this game is almost as efficient as it gets.
The new, adjusted QBR is now the number you'll find under the Total QBR column on the QBR page. The unadjusted QBR is now called "raw QBR" and is still available for all seasons and games. No player rating system can be perfect, but we think adjusting for opposing defenses is one more step forward for measuring total quarterback performance.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating
Guide to the Total Quarterback Rating
Aug 4, 2011
- Dean Oliver
Early in a scoreless game, a quarterback throws a 20-yard pass just by the reaching arms of a defender and into the hands of his intended receiver, who holds on despite the distraction, then scampers the remaining 15 yards for a touchdown.
Another quarterback, down 30-10 with five minutes left in the fourth quarter, throws a 3-yard screen pass to a running back, who maneuvers another 32 yards through prevent defense to pick up a first down deep in opponent territory.
Both are called good plays, but labeling them as "good" isn't enough. Each play has a different level of contribution to winning, and each play illustrates a different level of quarterback contribution. What is the quarterback's contribution to winning in each situation? Coaches want to know this; players want to know this; and fans want to know this.
The Total Quarterback Rating is a statistical measure that incorporates the contexts and details of those throws and what they mean for wins. It's built from the team level down to the quarterback, where we understand first what each play means to the team, then give credit to the quarterback for what happened on that play based on what he contributed.
At the team level, identifying what wins games is not revolutionary: scoring points and not allowing points. Back in the 1980s, "The Hidden Game of Football" did some pioneering work on that topic and on how yardage relates to points. We went back and updated what that book did then we went further. At the individual level, more detailed information about what quarterbacks do is really necessary. Brian Burke at AdvancedNFLStats.com has done very good work in advancing that effort, and FootballOutsiders.com has done some of this by charting data, but, for the past three years, ESPN has charted football games in immense detail. By putting all these ideas together and incorporating division of credit, we have built a metric of quarterback value, the Total Quarterback Rating, Total QBR or QBR for short.
What follows is a summary of what goes into QBR. It took several thousand lines of code to implement, but we'll keep this shorter.
Win Probability and Expected Points
The goal behind any player rating should be determining how much a player contributes to a win. We went back through 10 years of NFL play-by-play data to look at game situation (down, distance, yard line, clock time, timeouts, home field, field surface and score), along with the ultimate outcome of the game, to develop a win probability function.
This function treats every win the same, regardless of whether it was 45-3 or 24-23, though there is clearly a difference between such games. The first game represents total domination, whereas the other represents two fairly evenly matched teams. Because win probability treats every win the same, it misses some of what goes into the win, specifically many of the points that represent domination or the points that lead up to a last-second victory. So, although QBR uses win probability to assess how "clutch" a situation is, it uses expected points as the basis of evaluating quarterbacks. It has more of the details, and understands the difference between wins, but still strongly relates to wins in general.
The concept of expected points was discussed as early as the mid-1980s with Pete Palmer & Co. and "The Hidden Game of Football," in which they talk about "point potential." Their idea was that, as you move closer to the opponents' end zone, you are actually gaining points. Brian Burke took it further to note that third-and-10 from midfield, for instance, has fewer expected points than first-and-10 from midfield. In other words, down and distance also matter in terms of points. We took this even further to look at clock time, home field, timeouts and field surface to generate the expected points for any team given its situation in a drive. One particular situation to note is that, at the end of the half, a team is less likely to score any points than at most other times of the game, just because the half is going to expire.
It's useful to mention here that expected points are expected net points. It's possible that a team has expected points less than 0. This simply implies that the other team is generally more likely to score. This usually happens when a team is backed up deep in its own side of the field, especially if it is third or fourth down.
What then happens is an evaluation of expected points added. How does a team go from 1.1 expected points to 2.1? However it does it, that is 1.0 expected points to be distributed to the offensive players on the field. But how the team does it is what determines how credit is given to a quarterback.
Dividing Credit
Division of credit is the next step. Dividing credit among teammates is one of the most difficult but important aspects of sports. Teammates rely upon each other and, as the cliché goes, a team might not be the sum of its parts. By dividing credit, we are forcing the parts to sum up to the team, understanding the limitations but knowing that it is the best way statistically for the rating.
On a pass play, for instance, there are a few basic components:
• The pass protection
• The throw
• The catch
• The run after the catch
In the first segment, the blockers and the quarterback have responsibility for keeping the play alive, and the receivers have to get open for a QB to avoid a sack or having to throw the ball away. On the throw itself, a quarterback has to throw an accurate ball to the intended receiver. Certain receivers might run better or worse routes, so the ability of a QB to be on target also relates somewhat to the receivers. For the catch, it might be a very easy one where the QB laid it in right in stride and no defenders were there to distract the receiver. Or it could be that the QB threaded a needle and defenders absolutely hammered the receiver as he caught the ball, making it difficult to hold on. So even the catch is about both the receiver and the QB. Finally, the run after the catch depends on whether a QB hit the receiver in stride beyond the defense and on the ability of a receiver to be elusive. Whatever credit we give to the blockers, receivers and quarterback in these situations is designed to sum to the team expected points added.
The ESPN video tracking has been useful in helping to separate credit in plays like these. We track overthrows, underthrows, dropped passes, defended passes and yards after the catch. The big part was taking this information and analyzing how much of it was related to the QB, the receivers and the blockers. Not surprisingly, pass protection is related mostly to the QB and the offensive line, but yards after the catch is more about what the receiver does. Statistical analysis was able to show this, and we divided credit based on those things.
As a relevant side note, statistical analysis showed that what we call a dropped pass was not all a receiver's fault, either. A receiver might drop a ball because he wanted to run before catching it, because the defense distracted him, because it was a little bit behind him or because he was about to get hit by a defender. If the defender was there a half second before, the defender would have knocked the ball free and it would have been called a "defended pass," not a "dropped pass." There are shades of gray even on a dropped pass, and analysis showed that. Drops are less a QB's fault than defended passes or underthrows, but the QB does share some blame.
On most other plays, quarterbacks receive some portion of credit for the result of the play, including defensive pass interference, intentional grounding, scrambles, sacks, fumbles, fumble recoveries (Carson Palmer once recovered a teammate's fumble that saved the game for the Bengals) and throwaways.
On plays when the QB just hands off to a running back, we didn't assign any credit to the QB. Our NFL experts did suggest that some QBs are very good at interpreting defenses pre-snap and identifying better holes for their backs. However, they also told us it would be nearly impossible to incorporate. Because they suggested this, we built in the ability to give credit for QBs when they just handed off, but we couldn't find the right analysis to do it in 2011.
Clutch Index
The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.
These clutch index values came from an analysis of how different situations affect a game's win probability on average. One way to think of it is in terms of pressure. A clutch play is defined before the play by how close the game appears to be. Down four points with three seconds to go and facing third-and-goal from the 3-yard line -- that is a high-pressure and high-clutch index situation because the play can realistically raise the odds of winning to almost 100 percent or bring them down from about 40 percent to almost zero percent. The same situation from midfield isn't as high pressure because it's very unlikely that the team will pull out the victory. Sure, a Hail Mary can pull the game out, but if it doesn't work, the team didn't fail on that play so much as it failed before then. On third-and-goal from the 3-yard line, failure means people will be talking about that final play and what went wrong.
The clutch indices are multiplied by the quarterback's expected points on plays when the QB had a significant contribution, then divided by the sum of the clutch indices and multiplied by 100 to get a clutch-valued expected points added per 100 plays.
A Rating from 0 to 100
The final step is transforming the clutch-valued expected points rate to a number from 0 to 100. This is just a mathematical formula with no significance other than to make it easier to communicate. A value of 90 and above sounds good whether you're talking about a season, a game or just third-and-long situations; a value of four or 14 doesn't sound very good; a value of 50 is average, and that is what QBR generates for an average performance.
That being said, the top values in a season tend to be about 75 and above, whereas the top values in a game are in the upper 90s. Aaron Rodgers might have gone 31-of-36 for 366 yards, with three passing TDs, another TD running, 19 first-down conversions, and eight conversions on third or fourth down in one game -- for a single-game Total QBR of 97.2 -- but he can't keep that up all year long. Pro Bowl-level performance for a season usually means a QBR of at least 65 or 70. We don't expect to see a season with a QBR in the 90s.
Defensive Adjustment
With this rating, we have intentionally not adjusted for opponents. (This has changed, hence a "raw score")This doesn't mean that we won't adjust for opponents as we use it but that we want QBR to be flexible for many purposes, and keeping opponents' strength out gives us that flexibility. As it stands, QBR can be broken down for all sorts of situations -- red zone, third-and-long, throwing to a certain receiver, in bad weather, against different defensive formations. We didn't want to muddy it up with opponent adjustments that aren't as useful for those situations. How to implement a defensive adjustment for third-and-long also might be different from one for the whole season. Beyond this, a defensive adjustment is often not a constant factor. A defense that looks good in Week 4 might not be as good after a few more weeks. Because it isn't a constant thing, it makes sense to leave that for analysis rather than constant incorporation into QBR.
There will be analyses that we do on ESPN that will suggest the use of an opponent adjustment, but we will do that when needed, not up front.
Concluding Thoughts
What underlies QBR is an understanding of how football works and a lot of detailed situational data. What it yields are results that should reflect that. It illustrates that converting on third-and-long is important to a quarterback. It shows that a pass that is in the air for 40 yards is more reflective of a quarterback than a pass that is in the air for 5 yards and the receiver has 35 yards of run after the catch. These premises should sound reasonable to football fans. They come out of a lot of statistical analysis, but they are also consistent with what coaches and players understand.
As we neared the end of the development of QBR, we talked to Ron Jaworski and Greg Cosell at NFL Films about its evolution. Cosell said at one point, "Football is not complex, but it is very detailed." I realized then that QBR is like that. It is very detailed, accounting for a lot of different situations, but it is not particularly complex. It really does try to see the game the way we have gotten used to seeing it in its elegant simplicity. We hope you, the fan, appreciate it, as well.
LACHAMP46
A snazzy title
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,735
Thought you guys liked numbers.....they measure as much as when you throw a completion...as in what point in the game...what down and distance....
Several guys where posting during the game how "bad" the team was performing....It's what they were saying....
Several guys where posting during the game how "bad" the team was performing....It's what they were saying....
- Joined
- May 8, 2014
- Messages
- 38,860
I swear we need to make an effin I KNEW CARSON WENTZ WOULD BE THE BETTER QB sticky thread and leave it up so we can avoid the constant injection of those posts every time we discuss our QB. Then those posters can go in there and get all that recognition they're lookin for down the road if things turn out the way they think it will.
LACHAMP46
A snazzy title
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,735
Dude, QB's dive trying to score...I saw at least twice this year Goff doing the exact same thing at the goalline...it could have happened to anyone...any QB...that tries to score TD's running and diving into the endzone.
Stl2La
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2014
- Messages
- 3,581
Ya and on one of those Goff nearly broke his hand. It was the Arizona game in England. The fact is that Wentz’s style of play leads to more injuries. I hate to say it but I would almost guarantee Wentz gets hurt again trying to extend a play or running then not sliding to avoid contact.
Memphis Ram
Legend
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 7,286
Problem is that despite the coach speak, that "wrong point" seems inaccurate when I compare such to the other games played. And if so, that bring into question the attempted point being made. That is, unless Goff is changing a nice percentage of the plays.
- Joined
- May 8, 2014
- Messages
- 38,860
Jrry I know you're only trying to manage expectations. And yes, what you say is true and important to keep in mind as we go forward for the purpose of those expectations simply because no matter what we do the idiocy will start up if and when Jared does take a step back.
But that said, when QBs have those regression years there is typically a reason for it, be it injury to key members of the other ten on offense, loss of coordinators, scheme change/adjustment, etc. Matt Ryan's regression this year, for example, is an indicator of the loss of Shanahan as a play designer and caller IMO, but also might be him reverting back to who he really is.
When I look at Jared, though, and as I have mentioned before, the stars are aligned for him. He is surrounded by young talent that will grow with him in the run and pass game. He has one of the league's best offensive minds locked up in the head coach position, so teams cannot poach his coordinator. He is going to have defensive stability too, which is crucial and overlooked in this type of conversation, with Wade locked up as a DC that teams probably won't poach for their head coach positions. And lastly he has the dedication to being the best that a QB at this level needs.
Biggest risk that might keep this young man from growing statistically next year (i.e. more yards and TDs) would be key injuries. LT, RB depth are crucial there. They need a project with some feet behind Big Whit on the depth chart, and another RB who can execute the run/pass balance that Todd gives us. And of course they must address some key defensive needs to ensure Goff isn't in shootouts every week.
But of all the QBs in this league I believe Jared is set the F up for long term and sustained success year to year. His INTs might vary a bit with some of that bad luck element, but I'll be very surprised if he has one of those regression seasons. There is definitely more to it than the QB, and in most of those areas Jared is well prepared. And lastly this is why I think it's pretty funny that the media "experts" can't see it comin; they should be able to, and should be all over his nuts right now.
LACHAMP46
A snazzy title
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,735
I remember that....but QB's run into the endzone....scoring TD's in the redzone is a huge thing....they will always risk this in the heat of the moment.
Players get hurt in the NFL....QB's get hurt...running...or sitting in the pocket. I'd like to see a list of QB's that NEVER get hurt...and see if they are all pocket based....
I like a style that wins....
Stl2La
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2014
- Messages
- 3,581
True but it’s hard to continually win when you’re not on the field bc of injuries. Running qbs and qbs with the style of play that Wentz have open themselves up to a higher chance of injuries.
- Joined
- May 8, 2014
- Messages
- 38,860
All that aside, Champ, you cannot deny that Wentz runs to contact. He doesn't shy away, and it's something he will need to work on in order to ensure his career is long and as uninterrupted as possible at this level.
If I'm his coach, I load up an ipad loaded with John Elway film and make him watch it all offseason. I'm serious. Wentz can be the next Elway, he has that level of talent. But one thing Elway did was use his athleticism only to lengthen the off schedule play, vice running for positive yards into contact.
Guy like Wentz, as big and aggressive as he is, has to be coached to slide and have that constant reminder.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 23,712
I get that people still have their criticism of Goff, and its worth discussing.
ESPN's "Total QBR" however is complete trash and I cant take anyone seriously if using it to support or criticize a player...
ESPN's "Total QBR" however is complete trash and I cant take anyone seriously if using it to support or criticize a player...
Snaz
Pro Bowler
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2016
- Messages
- 1,243
- Name
- Shawn
I was pretty sure it was determined the hit going in the end zone is not what caused the injury. It supposedly happened prior to that and was a non contact injury.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2013
- Messages
- 39,992
@LACHAMP46 Just a couple more examples on QBR being complete and utter garbage. Anybody who tries to go to bat for this stat loses any and all credibility.
Now Jared Goff who is about to pass for 4k+ yards and has a chance for 30 TD's while only throwing 7 Ints has his 2 best games of the year based on this garbage stat as a 92.3 and a 94.9! Stop with this stat it's almost as embarrassing as your defense of Quick and GRob.
Now Jared Goff who is about to pass for 4k+ yards and has a chance for 30 TD's while only throwing 7 Ints has his 2 best games of the year based on this garbage stat as a 92.3 and a 94.9! Stop with this stat it's almost as embarrassing as your defense of Quick and GRob.
Last edited:
bluecoconuts
Legend
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,073
So do I, which is why I like Goff and his style.
Because that Eagles team being led by Nick Foles isn't going to the Super Bowl. The Rams still have a chance.
Legatron4
Legend
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 9,464
- Name
- Wes
John Elway was average. His career passer rating was 79.9 and didn’t hit 4000 yards passing until his 11th season. I think Wentz is much better. But I also think if Goff and Wentz played in the 1990s they would light up the record books. Their level of talent trumps anyone not named Dan Marino. Still to this day, the best pure passer of all time.
Soul Surfer
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 6,634
- Name
- Charles Mazyck
Remember you said that.
LACHAMP46
A snazzy title
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,735
Dan Marino was the greatest passer in my opinion also.
Elway was anything but average....he went to 4 super bowls...losing them all...before returning with a better Broncos team, led by Terrell Davis, winning 2. Yards passing per season was very different in his time....Which is why Marino was so great....but entirely different systems.
Not sure if many of todays players survive in the NFL as long as some of the old timers. You should see how they hit QB's then....much more violent.
Not so sure....Eagles own the home field advantage throughout the playoffs. And it's cold out there....we shall see...and soon.