QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by picklejuice:
whats a good beer to drink while watching purdy highlights?

.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Wait, so you believe a touchdown on second down, while in field goal range, when the score was 23 to 12 with six minutes minutes left is super clutch? The game was already a two score game and about to be extended with a field goal. If anything, that touchdown pass ought to matter less because the chances of the 49ers winning were already well above 90% at that point in the game.* As for the touchdown to Bell, the score was 3 to 3 in the middle of the second quarter. A great third down pass, but clutch? Come on. Clutch is when you're losing late in the fourth and convert a third and long.

*As you can see here, the 49ers chances of losing the game during that "clutch" moment were minuscule.
https://live.numberfire.com/nfl/8330

I mean really? Our win probability was already 98.79% and you think that's a clutch moment?

Like I said, homeritus is a dangerous thing. I am not knocking Purdy. He played well. He made some mistakes early, sure, but they didn't cost the team, and after he settled in he played like a Franchise QB. Negate the early portion and he played Super Bowl winning quarterbacking.

Total QBR takes into account situation, but also opponent's strength. The Jets have one of the best defenses in football. The Giants not so much. That's probably a big reason for the difference in and of itself.

As has been said before. Total QBR is not perfect. But it's still better than passer rating, which doesn't differentiate between player contributions to a given play.

II think that's the weirdest post I've read in a long time. I guess it comes down to the difference between "clutch" and "super clutch"

Watching a 49er quarterback throw us past the red zone for seven points is like water to a thirsty man in the desert for tour shanny offense. Yeah it's pretty clutch to turn a game that still has possibility to have some kind of crazy ending into a laugher with four or five minutes left? Yeah that's what Champions do. They shut the door they don't leave it open like we've had a tendency to do for the last few years. I think you've watched this team enough to know that it was a pretty impressive play. As far as it being either "clutch" or "super clutch" honestly I don't care you should focus more on consistency how many times has Brock done this in the last 10 games. Quite a few. That's the big picture. Not quibbling over some dumb Advanced stat that's complete opinion anyway. Sheesh. Talk about an agenda.

I am still trying to figure out how ALMOST INT's weigh heavy in that QBR stat but ALMOST TD's don't weigh anything.

I don't know for sure if almost INTs even do. I just know if I were grading QB performance, they would (assuming I had access to that data), because it's something the QB does (EDIT: In lieu of that data, for my own statistical analyses I tend to just use on target passing). As would great throws which are dropped, including almost TDs. But if I understand Total QBR, it's based almost entirely on EPA, weighted by various factors like situation and location on the field.

Honestly, my only strife is that if Brock doesn't throw those 2 TD passes against the giants, its essentially a 4 point game in the 4th quarter. While on the flip side, Dak against the same defense won 40-0 without throwing a TD pass, averaging only 6.0 ypa and completing only 54% of his passes. Dak may not have put the ball in harms way but he had no where near the impact Brock had in winning their respective games against the same defense imo. So why did Dak grade higher? It just doesn't make any sense to me if that stat is meant to determine how much of a factor the QB had in winning or losing a game. Who do you personally think had more of an impact on their team winning against the giants?

I think that's one of the problems with breaking everything down to a single play basis. It's why I'm not super high on EPA. Don't get me wrong, I'd still take Total QBR over passer rating in an instant. But to me I feel like there are simpler ways to gauge approximate QB value which don't require that level of sophistication, and the issues that come with that (such as overvaluing a situation because at the given moment it statistically is very important, but in hindsight at the end of the game it turns out that it's not as important as history might suggest). I think there's a simpler, better way: just do a statistical analysis of which stats correlate the most with winning, and weight them all by things like air yards to make sure the QB isn't getting too much credit, and combine them into a simple formula. IMHO that would be better. Perhaps not always as accurate, but the general trend will lead to it rating QBs approximately where they need to be with respect to one another.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by Crown:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:
There's still posters who are defending Trey Lance?! Lol weird

There are still posters that haven't moved on from Trey Lance. Sad

Now do Buckner.

Lot's of dudes hung up on their ex-girlfriends still.

These are the same dudes that thought Jimmy was the greatest thing since Montana but their awfully quiet about him now. Instead they need to randomly keep bringing up Trey that's currently a 3rd string lol. Weird coping mechanism.

Glad we have Purdy, he's definitely better than both those QBs and is on a path to be great.

Not a single Jimmy fan compared him to Montana. Only the miserable fans that put him to an unfair standard who complain about "almost INTs" and where balls are placed on game winning tds

again, nice try.

Your boy is gone. Get over it. Go be a raiders fan if you care so much that people say bad things about Jimmy. I'll buy you some tissues as well.

Says the one who gets upset when someone says something about the cowboys third string QB

im just responding to one of your many fabrications

Lolol making up s**t again -- fail lol. Don't care about Trey, he was a bust here which sucks bc we spent all that for him but he was a bust. Thankfully we got Purdy.

Let me know where u want me to send your tissues to.

You spent years replying " " to anyone that didn't having anything favorable to say about Trey. And you still hang around his thread posting random haircut pics. No need to hide it, this is how I picture you watching Brock Purdy on Sunday's knowing you spent far too much time and energy defending Trey Lance

Of course lmao I am a 49ers fan. You are a Jimmy fan. I wanted to see the guy we spent 3 picks on succeed bc that means 49ers will succeed. And lol at posting a haircut pic that's all you have?? What a child lol

Now we have Purdy who has the ability to be a great QB something we haven't had since Joe and Steve. Your meme is garbage bc your mad that not everyone thinks like u and your other couple of buddies that wanted nothing to do with Lance bc he was replacing sweet lil Jimmy.

Love Purdy. You fail again kid. Go to the raiders forum pls. Although I'm sure you already have an account on there telling everyone how great Jimmy is and everything else is the reason for their bad play 😂

And you don't see how you contradict yourself? so it's ok to root for Trey because the Niners spent several first round picks on him without actually proving he can be a franchise qb but it's not ok to root for the qb who won a lot of games while he was here. I like Jimmy despite his flaws, and so did alot of the players here. sucks we never won a Super Bowl with him but glad they got Purdy

you call people who don't agree with you Jimmy fans who need to root for the Raiders, but I'm the child 😂 I see you've come along way since your "" who doesn't agree with me days.

Originally posted by RickyRoma:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Absolutely agree, *so far, so good.* The only thing I would say with operating with lesser offensive talent, is that the OLine (specially on the right side) needs to be upgraded. You can operate with lesser offensive talent, in my opinion, if you have elite Offensive Line talent. Give Brock 3+ seconds and he can definitely create some passing offensive fireworks. Having said that, in the playoffs and possibly in the Super Bowl, those offensive talent deficiencies will show up, by a better team.

An example of that would be the 49ers vs Chargers, the Chargers were exposed in the super bowl by a more complete team. In other words, I'd like ShanaLynch to keep the offensive firepower up, and not let it diminish - if they want to get to the championship game year in and year out. (easier said that than done for sure, though).

I'm assuming you meant Dolphins, because that Charger team was one of the weakest teams to ever reach a SB.

If Purdy *is* a guy who can be that top 5 type of dude, then he's a player who can elevate those around him. He's going to get the ball out, so OL doesn't have to block a guy for 4+ seconds. He's going to feel the pressure, and maneuver within the pocket and hit the open guy - like he did with that throw to Kittle against the Giants that has been posted. He's going read and recognize pre and post snap, and poor receivers are going to look average, average receivers are going to look good, and good receivers are going to look great.

He's also gonna get paid....and that means other positions will have to be sacrificed. If Shanahan, with his scheme? And assuming he has a guy with *it* in Purdy? There are many ways to skin a cat, but I'd be all for the team to just to load up on defense, and make do with lesser offensive skill guys.

We have three years to worry about that.

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by picklejuice:
whats a good beer to drink while watching purdy highlights?

.

.

Originally posted by picklejuice:
whats a good beer to drink while watching purdy highlights?

Highlights of dinking and dunking

Originally posted by clara543:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
One simply thing that you could do that would at least slightly improve passer rating is multiply it by completed air yards per pass attempt (divided by 10, so it's just a small adjustment). That would at least give a coefficient which adds one tiny thing to distinguish between QBs who are doing most of the work and QBs who are getting more help from their WRs.

Should you do that, the top five passer rating QBs go from this:

Jordan Love 118.7
Kirk Cousins 114.2
Jared Goff 109.0
Russell Wilson 108.5
Brock Purdy 106.3

to this:

Jarod Goff 55.6
Kirk Cousins 53.7
Rusesll Wilson 48.8
Brock Purdy 45.7
Jordan Love 39.2

That at least puts Jordan Love where he belongs rather than as the best QB in the NFL (lol). It would also rightly put Tua where he belongs, ahead of all these guys at 58.7. (maybe I'm trashing on Love but I'm not convinced yet. The competition has been ass, and today he's not looking too great so far).

PFF actually grades Jordan Love below Purdy (65.0 vs 68.3). Tua is on top at 90.9.

That seems about right. Tua's playing out of his mind and Brock is better than Love thus far.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by RickyRoma:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Absolutely agree, *so far, so good.* The only thing I would say with operating with lesser offensive talent, is that the OLine (specially on the right side) needs to be upgraded. You can operate with lesser offensive talent, in my opinion, if you have elite Offensive Line talent. Give Brock 3+ seconds and he can definitely create some passing offensive fireworks. Having said that, in the playoffs and possibly in the Super Bowl, those offensive talent deficiencies will show up, by a better team.

An example of that would be the 49ers vs Chargers, the Chargers were exposed in the super bowl by a more complete team. In other words, I'd like ShanaLynch to keep the offensive firepower up, and not let it diminish - if they want to get to the championship game year in and year out. (easier said that than done for sure, though).

I'm assuming you meant Dolphins, because that Charger team was one of the weakest teams to ever reach a SB.

If Purdy *is* a guy who can be that top 5 type of dude, then he's a player who can elevate those around him. He's going to get the ball out, so OL doesn't have to block a guy for 4+ seconds. He's going to feel the pressure, and maneuver within the pocket and hit the open guy - like he did with that throw to Kittle against the Giants that has been posted. He's going read and recognize pre and post snap, and poor receivers are going to look average, average receivers are going to look good, and good receivers are going to look great.

He's also gonna get paid....and that means other positions will have to be sacrificed. If Shanahan, with his scheme? And assuming he has a guy with *it* in Purdy? There are many ways to skin a cat, but I'd be all for the team to just to load up on defense, and make do with lesser offensive skill guys.

We have three years to worry about that.

3? Thought it was 2 years?

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:
And you don't see how you contradict yourself? so it's ok to root for Trey because the Niners spent several first round picks on him without actually proving he can be a franchise qb but it's not ok to root for the qb who was winning a lot of games while he was here. I like Jimmy despite his flaws, and so did alot of the players here. sucks we never won a Super Bowl with him but glad they got Purdy

Well yah you root for the young guys before they prove themselves. I wasn't sure on Banks but I still rooted for him to be successful. Need some real data from a guy playing before you know what they are. Until then you should always root for the utmost success.

Once you have the data you root for them still but with a more realistic lens. Eventually we will get a more realistic lens of what Purdy can be. Hopefully it's closer to Brady/Brees but it's still to early to know with much certainty.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
These Trey_ning Wheels guys are down to this.

* Almost could have been a bad pass.
* Almost interception.
* Not pretty enough pass.

They can't find actual bad passes. Never losing, throwing touchdowns and winning games is not enough.

LOL who is this guy? A near interception is literally a bad pass. You're confusing bad PLAY with bad PASS. Trey Lance is not a 49er why are you bringing him up?

The reason Brock is winning is because his bad passes aren't usually dangerous (as opposed to Jimmy's—brought up because you're a card carrying Jimmy Club member who just brought up Lance—which are almost always bad reads and almost always into traffic), and Brock's good passes bail out the offensive line. In other words, while Brock is pretty accurate, but he's not the most accurate guy and he sometimes makes bad reads, but he has some Mahomes magic in the short game, he's a god in the medium game, and most importantly, he knows and sees where to go with the ball. He finds the open guy, and he does so as fast as is required by what's going on.

None of that has anything to do with Lance, nor does it mean he doesn't made bad passes. What a ludicrous thing to even argue. Every QB makes bad passes, and it's been a fact that Brock has made at least one bad read and had several inaccurate passes (including many which were completed). But unlike Lance (since you, the card carrying Jimmy Club member brought him up, since you hate Lance because he was drafted to replace Jimmy), his inaccurate passes are still ball park and catchable (while Lance's bad passes tend to be throw to the moon or through the dirt to China).

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:
Dallas will test Brock's poise, perhaps more than any other game. The competition will be intense and physical. Whether or not we win, if he can maintain that assassin's demeanor, he's definitely on his way to achieving all of great things we think he can.

Judging by how Dallas looked today, Brock will be handing off a lot against Dallas. They looked really soft today against the Cardinals, whose run defense also looked soft.

Agreed. But I think Dallas has more cause to intensely hate the Niners over the Cardinals. It's personal for them. Nevertheless, the outcome should be the same.

We shouldn't let the cards game fool us about Dallas, they're a very talented team and have played very physical and fast. For Example, last year in the playoffs - they played great against us. Very fast and violent on their part.

Dallas has a tendency to play to their opponents caliber, which to me says a lot about the leadership (which isn't a good thing). So in other words, they may come to play big time against us cause of the recent rivalry and whats at stake (seeding).

Todays game did shed light though on their weaknesses. A lot of people have been saying to run it right at Parsons, maybe they are right? I didn't pay a ton of attention to who they were running at but they gave up a ton yards on the ground.

Exactly. Fortunately only the player's attitudes matter, and I'm sure they will not be taking the Cowboys for granted.

Originally posted by SLCNiner:
Watching the Vegas game gives me that much more appreciation for Brock's pocket presence. Jimmy never had it and never will.

Hell yeah. He has everything you want mentally, and he's not even a full season in. There is room to grow, which is great.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Well yah you root for the young guys before they prove themselves. I wasn't sure on Banks but I still rooted for him to be successful. Need some real data from a guy playing before you know what they are. Until then you should always root for the utmost success.

Once you have the data you root for them still but with a more realistic lens. Eventually we will get a more realistic lens of what Purdy can be. Hopefully it's closer to Brady/Brees but it's still to early to know with much certainty.

comparing a rookie OG is not the same as the QB controversy that was going on.

anyways back to Purdy…lol

Originally posted by RiceOwensStokes:
comparing a rookie OG is not the same as the QB controversy that was going on.

anyways back to Purdy…lol

Well while Gore may have been wrong on the player he was absolutely right about the need to change QBs to reach our potential.

Theres no hating of Purdy

Originally posted by Leathaface:
Listening to that loudmouth idiot Bart Scott talking about Purdy on ESPN was disgusting. Basically said he sucks, Daniel Jones is better, Purdy has no skillset, is carried. The same old crap everyone is saying. Can't believe these guys are allowed on TV. The national media has no clue about Purdy and they will NEVER give him credit due to his draft position, even if he wins a SB. The guys on YouTube who do All-22 breakdowns like JTO and others are drooling over how good Purdy is. They're so much better to watch than these national media idiots.

It's funny how former players like Bart Scott think they have valid opinions because they played the game; as if someone who has never played at a high level can't understand the game better than them.

LOL no way hahaha.

Let me just say this though: the same thing happened with Tom Brady until about when he was nearing his third Super Bowl win.