There are 285 users in the forums
Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:
Originally posted by Young2Owens:
wait so we gotta apologize after 3 good games against bad defenses?
Yes?…
a lot of you guys claimed he wasn't worth anything and used losing football organizations that didn't want to trade for him to justify your claims.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
He has had 1 poor game this season and that was the DEN game. He has had a poor play here and there but other than that he has been solid this season.
I thought the KC game was poor it was mostly good but the bad outweighed the good making it not a good game. Go back and look at that INT from holding the ball not getting it out into the blitz. Also holding the ball, getting strip sacked. Finally, he got safetied from holding the ball in his own endzone which was clownish. The problems as usual stem from not getting it out quick, which I am noticing improvement recently. CMC effect helping as it is drawing the D away, opening up some space out there.
The 1st half vs. SD wasn't good either. Picked it up come the 2nd half.
Wasn't good in the 1st quarter of the ARI game either since we couldn't get the offense moving on two straight drives. Am I doing this right?
A half and a quarter aren't equivalent so statistically speaking, no.
But if we are going to nitpick, we got to do it right.
This is the Jimmy thread. Adding onto a point that he didn't look all that good for a half of football isin't nitpicking. How he looks the 1st half of games is a concern of mines, and with a roster of playmakers like this, has been one for some time. "Nitpicking" is just another one of those words that lead us away from the topic, which as I see it was how he played in past games.
If you are going to do it right then acknowledge how he played the other 3 quarters, as I did w/the 2nd half.
So it is okay for you to single out one half of football but I am not allowed to single out 2 drives? That just isn't fair.
Put the rest of the game in context. You asked if you're doing it right so I helped you out with where your gaffe was.
And again,....saying a player didn't look very good for an entire 1st half of football isint nitpicking.
If it is then you can throw out all the analytical numbers you bring here to the forum,...because they all attempt to capture in one way or another what I'm saying.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by ritz126:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Passer rating has always been stupid. Every player always laughed about it. QBR is not perfect but it's a better metric. I'll trust the players and coaches when it comes to this.
which is more accurate
Daniel Jones is a top 10 QB or Daniel Jones is the 19th ranked QB
Derek Carr is a top 10 QB or the 16th ranked QB
Jacoby Brisset is a top 10 QB or the 18th ranked QB
Marcus Mariotta is a 11th ranked QB (LOL) or 17th?
Also the idea that Trever Lawrence andy dalton Goff and the other QBs above are ranked above Jimmy and even Cousins (who imo hasn't played amazingly but definitely well) is laughable it throws out the stat completely
they really need to rework that formula
Just need to wait for more data points.
No.
Yes. That's how this works. The main difference between passer rating and QBR—other than the fact that the former gives credit and blame to the QB that should go to the WRs—is that you can play a bad game and still have a high passer rating. For example, in the 2011-2012 NFCCG, Alex Smith had a 97.6 passer rating. And we were 1-13 on third down, and Alex was 9-23 for 84 yards on all but three passes. Passer rating is too limited to tell the truth about the quarterback.
More data points for a bad formula isn't going to help. You act like there aren't a s**t ton of examples of QB's with high QBR's who played terrible.
Have you heard the mathematical expression "returning to the mean?" Well sometimes you have statistical anomalies. Sometimes you have several in a row. But with enough time, the truth is revealed.
In any event, if we had a competition over who can find more bad games with high ratings, I'd win with passer rating over you with QBR.
No you wouldn't. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many more outliers with QBR than QB rating. That's not just this season, every season that QBR has been around it's like that. You just favor QB's who can run, as does ESPN because they're cool highlights, and fantasy football players because it racks up points. QBR is a reflection of the new generation of fan that cares about highlights and fantasy points.
Yes, I would.
1.) There aren't more outliers with QBR than QB rating. The top ten list is almost identical. More interestingly, if you take the top thirty* Total QBR and passer rating and see how the top scores and bottom scores correlate, they're almost exactly correlated (QBR is already normalized, so you have to normalize passer rating). So you must mean something else by "outlier" than a numerical outlier, because the two have identical correlation with one another when each rating is listed in numerical order.
If you mean players being more than a standard deviation above the mean, passer rating has six values that are more than a standard deviation above the mean, while Total QBR has only four values more than a standard deviation above the mean. As far as more than a standard deviation below the mean, passer rating has four below the mean, while Total QBR also has four more than one standard deviation below the mean. This indicates that passer rating inflates the difference between the good and not good more than Total QBR does (on this limited sample size), and that passer rating actually has more outliers.
*30 because I have 30 slots on my Excel sheet with the relevant formulas and don't feel like adding two or more rows.
If instead you just mean mediocre QBs at the top that you don't feel belong there, and good QBs near the bottom that you feel should be higher, well first of all, your OPINION on them is hardly gospel. And second, you'd obviously not be considering the fact that several young QBs took big steps this year—which is AS IS EXPECTED at some point in the careers of highly drafted QBs (such as Tua and Hurts). As for Geno Smith, his passer rating is hardly higher than last year, but his QBR is a lot higher. And absolutely no one disputes that he's having a career year. Which means QBR tells Geno Smith's story more accurately than passer rating. As for Derek Carr, he's been mediocre to slightly above average for several years. Guess what his 59.1 QBR is? Mediocre to slightly above average. Him being 10th in QBR doesn't mean he's the 10th best QB. It means some good QBs have had a couple of games where they struggled uncharacteristically, and as a result, the whole of all QB performance outside the very top performers has taken a hit.
Meanwhile, you have the likes of Andy Dalton as the 9th best QB based on passer rating, and as for QBR, the only strange one is Brissett (Cooper Rush went 4-1 in his starts. He "just won," and he "just won" for the same reason Jimmy "just wins." Rush had four games where he was managing the game and making the necessary plays, and one singular horrible game where he threw 3 interceptions, and for that one game, his four decent games are erased in passer rating.
Of the top 10 guys in QBR, only two of them have a passer rating ranking that is different by 5 or more rankings. Of the top 10 guys in passer rating, FOUR guys have a passer rating more than 5 rankings different than their QBR ranking. If one of these ratings systems has more outliers, it's passer rating. At least for the top ranked guys.
As for the bottom 10 guys, QBR has 3 guys with the worst QBR who rank more than 5 spots differently in passer rating. Passer rating also has only 3 guys with rankings in QBR more than 5 spots different.
.
.
And lastly, with respect to Jimmy, his QBR on the season is presently 50.4. That's very slightly above average for the year. He's played in 9 games. He's played one absolutely horrid game, two other bad games (Atlanta and Kansas City—they were bad games, sorry fan bois), three pretty good games (Seattle, Panthers, Rams and Chargers), two excellent games (Rams and Cardinals). On balance, the Falcons and Chiefs games cancel out two of the "pretty good" games, and the Broncos game was so bad it cancels out one excellent game as well as another pretty good game. That leaves you with a little better than "pretty good" for the year. So his QBR for the year is maybe 5 points lower than it should be. And that factor is easily accounted for by remembering how many huge plays the weapons he has makes, which as a whole is simply superior to everyone else in terms of action after the ball is in their hands.
His passer rating is high because passer rating is not capable of understanding how truly horrible his Broncos game was, and it's that game right there that is the albatross keeping his QBR barely at average (and rightfully so). However, with more games, the weight of that Broncos game will diminish, and a more accurate representation of what Jimmy has done this year will be represented.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by NukeEnglandPutin:
How pathetic do you have to be to "enjoy" banning someone from an internet forum? I'll bet you think moderating a 49ers message board is an actual career. Talk about impotent.
This guy can't be serious, can he?
Jimmy played the best game since his NO game some time ago. Why is Ribs/TreyDey not happy?
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by Furlow:
NY definitely needs to fill one out lol.
Oh piss off. I've said Jimmy plays well when he actually plays well. I don't have to defend him no matter what, like some of ya'll.
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
saleh would probably give jimmy the bag for '23
If Jimmy plays like this the rest of the year there's gonna be a bidding war.
Jimmy has plenty of money. If things work out in the best possible way (Super Bowl win), he'll take less money to stay here. Book it.
Spotrac has estimated Garoppolo's market value at $34M/yr with the new cap. That would set him at the #12-14 slot among QBs. If that happened, it would pay him roughly the same value as compared to the cap as his prior contract. As you say, "Book it."
Yeah I don't know why people think Jimmy would take $10M a year to be the backup to Trey after playing the way he's been playing this season lol.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
saleh would probably give jimmy the bag for '23
If Jimmy plays like this the rest of the year there's gonna be a bidding war.
Jimmy has plenty of money. If things work out in the best possible way (Super Bowl win), he'll take less money to stay here. Book it.
Spotrac has estimated Garoppolo's market value at $34M/yr with the new cap. That would set him at the #12-14 slot among QBs. If that happened, it would pay him roughly the same value as compared to the cap as his prior contract. As you say, "Book it."
Yeah I don't know why people think Jimmy would take $10M a year to be the backup to Trey after playing the way he's been playing this season lol.
He wouldn't. He wouldn't take only 34m/year either. His haters want to see him hurt financially by resigning to a team friendly deal, but there is no reason he shouldn't get paid at least as much as someone like Kyler Murray, who he has outplayed.
Originally posted by YACBros85:
So since we are singling out every game, half, drive, etc. If I am keeping score correctly. He has had 3 poor games, 1 poor half and 2 poor drives. Should we go rep for rep now? How about we just look at the full body of work this season to make our evaluations instead?
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by ritz126:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Passer rating has always been stupid. Every player always laughed about it. QBR is not perfect but it's a better metric. I'll trust the players and coaches when it comes to this.
which is more accurate
Daniel Jones is a top 10 QB or Daniel Jones is the 19th ranked QB
Derek Carr is a top 10 QB or the 16th ranked QB
Jacoby Brisset is a top 10 QB or the 18th ranked QB
Marcus Mariotta is a 11th ranked QB (LOL) or 17th?
Also the idea that Trever Lawrence andy dalton Goff and the other QBs above are ranked above Jimmy and even Cousins (who imo hasn't played amazingly but definitely well) is laughable it throws out the stat completely
they really need to rework that formula
Just need to wait for more data points.
No.
Yes. That's how this works. The main difference between passer rating and QBR—other than the fact that the former gives credit and blame to the QB that should go to the WRs—is that you can play a bad game and still have a high passer rating. For example, in the 2011-2012 NFCCG, Alex Smith had a 97.6 passer rating. And we were 1-13 on third down, and Alex was 9-23 for 84 yards on all but three passes. Passer rating is too limited to tell the truth about the quarterback.
More data points for a bad formula isn't going to help. You act like there aren't a s**t ton of examples of QB's with high QBR's who played terrible.
Have you heard the mathematical expression "returning to the mean?" Well sometimes you have statistical anomalies. Sometimes you have several in a row. But with enough time, the truth is revealed.
In any event, if we had a competition over who can find more bad games with high ratings, I'd win with passer rating over you with QBR.
No you wouldn't. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many more outliers with QBR than QB rating. That's not just this season, every season that QBR has been around it's like that. You just favor QB's who can run, as does ESPN because they're cool highlights, and fantasy football players because it racks up points. QBR is a reflection of the new generation of fan that cares about highlights and fantasy points.
Yes, I would.
1.) There aren't more outliers with QBR than QB rating. The top ten list is almost identical. More interestingly, if you take the top thirty* Total QBR and passer rating and see how the top scores and bottom scores correlate, they're almost exactly correlated (QBR is already normalized, so you have to normalize passer rating). So you must mean something else by "outlier" than a numerical outlier, because the two have identical correlation with one another when each rating is listed in numerical order.
If you mean players being more than a standard deviation above the mean, passer rating has six values that are more than a standard deviation above the mean, while Total QBR has only four values more than a standard deviation above the mean. As far as more than a standard deviation below the mean, passer rating has four below the mean, while Total QBR also has four more than one standard deviation below the mean. This indicates that passer rating inflates the difference between the good and not good more than Total QBR does (on this limited sample size), and that passer rating actually has more outliers.
*30 because I have 30 slots on my Excel sheet with the relevant formulas and don't feel like adding two or more rows.
If instead you just mean mediocre QBs at the top that you don't feel belong there, and good QBs near the bottom that you feel should be higher, well first of all, your OPINION on them is hardly gospel. And second, you'd obviously not be considering the fact that several young QBs took big steps this year—which is AS IS EXPECTED at some point in the careers of highly drafted QBs (such as Tua and Hurts). As for Geno Smith, his passer rating is hardly higher than last year, but his QBR is a lot higher. And absolutely no one disputes that he's having a career year. Which means QBR tells Geno Smith's story more accurately than passer rating. As for Derek Carr, he's been mediocre to slightly above average for several years. Guess what his 59.1 QBR is? Mediocre to slightly above average. Him being 10th in QBR doesn't mean he's the 10th best QB. It means some good QBs have had a couple of games where they struggled uncharacteristically, and as a result, the whole of all QB performance outside the very top performers has taken a hit.
Meanwhile, you have the likes of Andy Dalton as the 9th best QB based on passer rating, and as for QBR, the only strange one is Brissett (Cooper Rush went 4-1 in his starts. He "just won," and he "just won" for the same reason Jimmy "just wins." Rush had four games where he was managing the game and making the necessary plays, and one singular horrible game where he threw 3 interceptions, and for that one game, his four decent games are erased in passer rating.
Of the top 10 guys in QBR, only two of them have a passer rating ranking that is different by 5 or more rankings. Of the top 10 guys in passer rating, FOUR guys have a passer rating more than 5 rankings different than their QBR ranking. If one of these ratings systems has more outliers, it's passer rating. At least for the top ranked guys.
As for the bottom 10 guys, QBR has 3 guys with the worst QBR who rank more than 5 spots differently in passer rating. Passer rating also has only 3 guys with rankings in QBR more than 5 spots different.
.
.
And lastly, with respect to Jimmy, his QBR on the season is presently 50.4. That's very slightly above average for the year. He's played in 9 games. He's played one absolutely horrid game, two other bad games (Atlanta and Kansas City—they were bad games, sorry fan bois), three pretty good games (Seattle, Panthers, Rams and Chargers), two excellent games (Rams and Cardinals). On balance, the Falcons and Chiefs games cancel out two of the "pretty good" games, and the Broncos game was so bad it cancels out one excellent game as well as another pretty good game. That leaves you with a little better than "pretty good" for the year. So his QBR for the year is maybe 5 points lower than it should be. And that factor is easily accounted for by remembering how many huge plays the weapons he has makes, which as a whole is simply superior to everyone else in terms of action after the ball is in their hands.
His passer rating is high because passer rating is not capable of understanding how truly horrible his Broncos game was, and it's that game right there that is the albatross keeping his QBR barely at average (and rightfully so). However, with more games, the weight of that Broncos game will diminish, and a more accurate representation of what Jimmy has done this year will be represented.
Oh, and it's not running yards by a QB that makes QBR different from passer rating. I've already explained this to you twice. It's that QBR takes into account CONTEXT of the stat. It takes into account whether the pass was a throwaway or spike, whether it was dropped, whether it was short or long, and so on.
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by Furlow:
NY definitely needs to fill one out lol.
Oh piss off. I've said Jimmy plays well when he actually plays well. I don't have to defend him no matter what, like some of ya'll.
"Bag of chips. Cut him."
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Waterbear:I will piggy back on that.. Rush had jerry contemplating on sitting Dak
Originally posted by Furlow:
Cooper Rush's stats this year:
7 games (5 starts)
150 yards/game
58.4 completion %
6.5 yards/attempt
5 TD's (3.1 TD %)
3 INT's (1.9 INT %)
80.5 QB rating
60.8 QBR (7th in the NFL)
I'd bet money you've never watched him play.
Yeah okay. He's going to sit his $40M/year franchise QB for Cooper Rush. Y'all say Jimmy gets carried but want to give credit to Rush. Pathetic.
Originally posted by Furlow:
It heavily weights running (you add the passing and running metrics together for total QBR). Hence why QB's like Fields, Daniel Jones, Lamar Jackson, Mariota, Brissett, etc. are ahead of Jimmy G. If you want to at least appear unbiased, then only use the passing metric for QB's. That puts Jimmy ahead of all of those besides Brissett. Essentially, it removes the outliers and more closely resembles passer rating. That's if you still think that QB's should pass the ball, rather than run it.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by WhyQBsAreGood:
By the way: When you have to ban someone, all you do is prove you fear what they have to say and can't argue against it. SJWs love bans.
By the way, we don't ban you because we can't argue against what you say. We ban you because we enjoy it.
