Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

You know what, the people who thinks Jimmy is a winner is RIGHT! Jimmy Garoppolo deserves 1 more shot. Bring him back for the '22-'23 season!! So he can do this 👇🏾 cause he's a WINNER!! #FTTB pic.twitter.com/1as2hie8qD

— K ♕ N G - S I R S K I 😈 (@King_Sirski) May 7, 2022

Lol a vast majority of interceptions are like this. Literally most interceptions are poor throws or bad reads. I can show every QB in the league throwing an interception worse than this. It was actually a very good play by the DB imo but hey twitter and stuff. Making garbage points since day one.

Which one are you referring to? That was a LOOOONG video.

The first as far as DB, as far as the rest they are typical ints that nearly every QB makes. Hell Stafford had one to Tartt that possibly could've helped win us the game if caught. You guys act like there are QBs that throw good interceptions and it's just a terrible argument.

No, there are certainly QBs who throw fewer though. A lot fewer.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Finally finished my dorky QB rating metric. Jimmy surprised me a bit, finishing at 12th (I'm not fully amazed at this, but it's definitely the high end of the range where I tend to rank him).

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/196068-new-homegrown-rating-metric-jimmy-controversially-ranks-12th/

And Trey had a better rating, for the record (although with small sample sizes there will be large variations).

Each input in this rating is statistically tied directly to correlation with winning. The only divergence from this with rushing yards, which surprisingly has a very weak negative correlation with winning (But it made no football sense to not include it, and because it is statistically insignificant, I flipped the sign and did a separate correlation analysis for guys who rush for a lot if yards per game, and gave them a bonus based on the positive correlation with winning their rushing yards had.)

Other than that, I made sacks and dominant wins 25% on the QB.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Finally finished my dorky QB rating metric. Jimmy surprised me a bit, finishing at 12th (I'm not fully amazed at this, but it's definitely the high end of the range where I tend to rank him).

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/196068-new-homegrown-rating-metric-jimmy-controversially-ranks-12th/

And Trey had a better rating, for the record (although with small sample sizes there will be large variations).

Each input in this rating is statistically tied directly to correlation with winning. The only divergence from this with rushing yards, which surprisingly has a very weak negative correlation with winning (But it made no football sense to not include it, and because it is statistically insignificant, I flipped the sign and did a separate correlation analysis for guys who rush for a lot if yards per game, and gave them a bonus based on the positive correlation with winning their rushing yards had.)

Other than that, I made sacks and dominant wins 25% on the QB.

Appreciate all the work you put into it.

Many here won't even read based on your conclusion, but they definitely should, even it goes against their preconceived notion.

Anyways, great job!

Originally posted by wisecraft:

Let's call Pittsburgh and offer them Tyrion Davis-Price and Jimmy G. For Najee Harris. That would help the Steelers QB situation with a upgrade and mentor for the future.

Originally posted by theninermaniac:
Let's offer Jimmy his release in exchange for 25 mil off his final year

Originally posted by theninermaniac:

Let's offer Jimmy his release in exchange for 25 mil off his final year

Originally posted by theninermaniac:
Let's offer Jimmy his release in exchange for 25 mil off his final year

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Finally finished my dorky QB rating metric. Jimmy surprised me a bit, finishing at 12th (I'm not fully amazed at this, but it's definitely the high end of the range where I tend to rank him).

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/196068-new-homegrown-rating-metric-jimmy-controversially-ranks-12th/

And Trey had a better rating, for the record (although with small sample sizes there will be large variations).

Each input in this rating is statistically tied directly to correlation with winning. The only divergence from this with rushing yards, which surprisingly has a very weak negative correlation with winning (But it made no football sense to not include it, and because it is statistically insignificant, I flipped the sign and did a separate correlation analysis for guys who rush for a lot if yards per game, and gave them a bonus based on the positive correlation with winning their rushing yards had.)

Other than that, I made sacks and dominant wins 25% on the QB.

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Finally finished my dorky QB rating metric. Jimmy surprised me a bit, finishing at 12th (I'm not fully amazed at this, but it's definitely the high end of the range where I tend to rank him).

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/196068-new-homegrown-rating-metric-jimmy-controversially-ranks-12th/

And Trey had a better rating, for the record (although with small sample sizes there will be large variations).

Each input in this rating is statistically tied directly to correlation with winning. The only divergence from this with rushing yards, which surprisingly has a very weak negative correlation with winning (But it made no football sense to not include it, and because it is statistically insignificant, I flipped the sign and did a separate correlation analysis for guys who rush for a lot if yards per game, and gave them a bonus based on the positive correlation with winning their rushing yards had.)

Other than that, I made sacks and dominant wins 25% on the QB.

Appreciate all the work you put into it.

Many here won't even read based on your conclusion, but they definitely should, even it goes against their preconceived notion.

Anyways, great job!

Yup good stuff. That's right where I put Jimmy myself. Around the Cousins, Ryan, Tannehill area. Good QB's but every one of them have flaws.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Finally finished my dorky QB rating metric. Jimmy surprised me a bit, finishing at 12th (I'm not fully amazed at this, but it's definitely the high end of the range where I tend to rank him).

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/196068-new-homegrown-rating-metric-jimmy-controversially-ranks-12th/

And Trey had a better rating, for the record (although with small sample sizes there will be large variations).

Each input in this rating is statistically tied directly to correlation with winning. The only divergence from this with rushing yards, which surprisingly has a very weak negative correlation with winning (But it made no football sense to not include it, and because it is statistically insignificant, I flipped the sign and did a separate correlation analysis for guys who rush for a lot if yards per game, and gave them a bonus based on the positive correlation with winning their rushing yards had.)

Other than that, I made sacks and dominant wins 25% on the QB.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
The bad thing about Jimmy is is choked in the 4th quarter of a SB.

Originally posted by TonyStarks:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
The bad thing about Jimmy is is choked in the 4th quarter of a SB.

because he gave up airballs to Tyreek Hill?