Are Wins a QB stat?

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
So when certain guys like 49AT blame Jimmy for not getting us a super bowl isn't that hypocrisy? It's a team stat. Me, I think the defense could've played better but at the end of the day Jimmy had his chances and failed. It is his L. Right?

It's only contradicting like that for you, since you want to use/assign W/L as an individual stat

And I pin the game on Jimmy. You on the other hand blame Jimmy for nearly everything then claim it's a team game the next breath. It's why you have nearly 4000 post in the oast QB thread but 80 in the Bosa thread.

Because it's a QB driven sport. Plain and simple.

Are you really that unaware of how the game is played ? You are new here, so you have missed the discussions. But in reality, you have a pie chart for each game and there's a certain % for everyone who contributed with the end result. some players contributed more and some players less. It's not that hard to see that and it's why W/L is not an individual stat

and what does post count for a guy that you really know isn't the weak leak on the defense have to do with this

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
So when certain guys like 49AT blame Jimmy for not getting us a super bowl isn't that hypocrisy? It's a team stat. Me, I think the defense could've played better but at the end of the day Jimmy had his chances and failed. It is his L. Right?

It's only contradicting like that for you, since you want to use/assign W/L as an individual stat

And I pin the game on Jimmy. You on the other hand blame Jimmy for nearly everything then claim it's a team game the next breath. It's why you have nearly 4000 post in the oast QB thread but 80 in the Bosa thread.

Because it's a QB driven sport. Plain and simple.

Are you really that unaware of how the game is played ? You are new here, so you have missed the discussions. But in reality, you have a pie chart for each game and there's a certain % for everyone who contributed with the end result. some player contributed and some player less. It's not that hard and it'w why W/L is not an individual stat

and what does post count for a guy that you really know isn't the weak leak on the defense have to do with this

Mr Att show me the pie chart on the nfl.com I am not seeing it

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
So when certain guys like 49AT blame Jimmy for not getting us a super bowl isn't that hypocrisy? It's a team stat. Me, I think the defense could've played better but at the end of the day Jimmy had his chances and failed. It is his L. Right?

It's only contradicting like that for you, since you want to use/assign W/L as an individual stat

And I pin the game on Jimmy. You on the other hand blame Jimmy for nearly everything then claim it's a team game the next breath. It's why you have nearly 4000 post in the oast QB thread but 80 in the Bosa thread.

Because it's a QB driven sport. Plain and simple.

Are you really that unaware of how the game is played ? You are new here, so you have missed the discussions. But in reality, you have a pie chart for each game and there's a certain % for everyone who contributed with the end result. some player contributed and some player less. It's not that hard and it'w why W/L is not an individual stat

and what does post count for a guy that you really know isn't the weak leak on the defense have to do with this

Mr Att show me the pie chart on the nfl.com I am not seeing it

gonna have to download it

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

That's not the question though. The question is, are wins a QB stat? The simple answer is, yes they are because, as far as I know it is a player metric that is only used by the NFL, who I think we can all agree are the final arbiters of how stats are recorded for their league, for one position, and that's the QB. It's not a WR stat or a LB stat or a kicker stat. Does that mean that the QB is solely responsible for whether or not a team wins or loses? Of course not, but, as a matter of record, it is a stat that is only assigned to the QB individually among players and to the team as a whole and to the head coach.

If we were in the Kansas City forum I don't imagine there would be any argument about whether or not Mahomes was a contributing factor to their success. But because this is Niner Talk and there is a small, but dedicated subset of posters, whose sole purpose in life seems to be denying that Jimmy Garappolo has contributed ANYTHING AT ALL to the teams success since he's been here, this ridiculous argument has become a thing that someone felt was worthy of its own thread.

Wins should not be a QB stat. The offense plays half the game. Football is very much a team game. The QB plays a critical role but also needs alot to happen for him to be successful. When WZers go on about Jimmy wins games, it laugable, on many levels.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
So when certain guys like 49AT blame Jimmy for not getting us a super bowl isn't that hypocrisy? It's a team stat. Me, I think the defense could've played better but at the end of the day Jimmy had his chances and failed. It is his L. Right?

It's only contradicting like that for you, since you want to use/assign W/L as an individual stat

And I pin the game on Jimmy. You on the other hand blame Jimmy for nearly everything then claim it's a team game the next breath. It's why you have nearly 4000 post in the oast QB thread but 80 in the Bosa thread.

Because it's a QB driven sport. Plain and simple.

Are you really that unaware of how the game is played ? You are new here, so you have missed the discussions. But in reality, you have a pie chart for each game and there's a certain % for everyone who contributed with the end result. some players contributed more and some players less. It's not that hard to see that and it's why W/L is not an individual stat

and what does post count for a guy that you really know isn't the weak leak on the defense have to do with this

Post count was to show that QB threads like Jimmy literally have about 50% of the total post in the entire front page post. Point in that being that the QB, and it's not even remotely close, is the most important position and gets the most blame or credit. This is why they get credited with wins. People want to sit and say it's a team sport yet out of a roster with 53 players, many coaches, ownership only one position gets talked about around 50% of the time.

Sure it's a team sport but the QB is by far the most looked at abd talked about. If you really believed it was a team sport you(not you but generalizing) would talk about the other 52 too. As I said, it's a QB driven league.

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
Post count was to show that QB threads like Jimmy literally have about 50% of the total post in the entire front page post. Point in that being that the QB, and it's not even remotely close, is the most important position and gets the most blame or credit. This is why they get credited with wins. People want to sit and say it's a team sport yet out of a roster with 53 players, many coaches, ownership only one position gets talked about around 50% of the time.

Sure it's a team sport but the QB is by far the most looked at abd talked about. If you really believed it was a team sport you(not you but generalizing) would talk about the other 52 too. As I said, it's a QB driven league.

That because the QB is very difficult to master. The QB still needs alot around him on offense for him to even have a chance. Oh, ya and he doesnt play defense or special teams for that matter. How many SBs does Brady win without Vinny.

Originally posted by boast:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
The argument is not whether it's a stat, it's whether it's a good one. It's annoying when posters dismiss any conversation about the stat's value by saying "well it IS a stat."

Most posters know it IS a stat. A good portion of us think it's a dumb stat.

Major League Baseball analysts have majorly discredited Wins for pitchers as a good stat. I feel the same way about wins for pitchers as I do for quarterbacks.

ehhh this ignores and kind of whitewashes the fact there are more than a few posters that have specifically claimed it's NOT a QB stat. it might not have been you but this debate definitely existed.

Highlighted the fact that I said it was most posters, which it is.

For the record, I used to believe it wasnt a QB stat. But I have changed my stance on it. I still dont believe it holds much weight, but if its acknowledged as an official stat, who am I to argue with it?

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:
So when certain guys like 49AT blame Jimmy for not getting us a super bowl isn't that hypocrisy? It's a team stat. Me, I think the defense could've played better but at the end of the day Jimmy had his chances and failed. It is his L. Right?

It's only contradicting like that for you, since you want to use/assign W/L as an individual stat

And I pin the game on Jimmy. You on the other hand blame Jimmy for nearly everything then claim it's a team game the next breath. It's why you have nearly 4000 post in the oast QB thread but 80 in the Bosa thread.

Because it's a QB driven sport. Plain and simple.

Are you really that unaware of how the game is played ? You are new here, so you have missed the discussions. But in reality, you have a pie chart for each game and there's a certain % for everyone who contributed with the end result. some players contributed more and some players less. It's not that hard to see that and it's why W/L is not an individual stat

and what does post count for a guy that you really know isn't the weak leak on the defense have to do with this

Post count was to show that QB threads like Jimmy literally have about 50% of the total post in the entire front page post. Point in that being that the QB, and it's not even remotely close, is the most important position and gets the most blame or credit. This is why they get credited with wins. People want to sit and say it's a team sport yet out of a roster with 53 players, many coaches, ownership only one position gets talked about around 50% of the time.

Sure it's a team sport but the QB is by far the most looked at abd talked about. If you really believed it was a team sport you(not you but generalizing) would talk about the other 52 too. As I said, it's a QB driven league.

I would agree with this. QB has outsized post counts cuz they have outsized importance relative to other positions. It's the most important position in sports.

Take MLB for example. In MLB a starting pitcher is hugely important. Scherzer's contract for example is like $43m annual. Teams rotate 5 starters, so one starter only plays maybe 30-32 out of 162 games, in a best case. Not only that, but starters don't pitch 9 innings outside rare cases, usually 5-7 innings. Imagine being able to start Scherzer for every inning of a 162 game season. That's basically the advantage QB rich teams have. Every time KC has the ball, Mahomes is on the mound so to speak, for all 4 qtrs of every game. It's an insane advantage.

Clearly the NFL itself realizes the outsized role QB has that's why they have W/L records and other positions don't. Tbh, I almost don't like how much of a QB league it is. It's out of whack. How good your QB is almost as important as all the other spots put together. For example would you rather be a talented club with Wentz at QB or a talent poor club with Mahomes? It's an open question.

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

That's not the question though. The question is, are wins a QB stat? The simple answer is, yes they are because, as far as I know it is a player metric that is only used by the NFL, who I think we can all agree are the final arbiters of how stats are recorded for their league, for one position, and that's the QB. It's not a WR stat or a LB stat or a kicker stat. Does that mean that the QB is solely responsible for whether or not a team wins or loses? Of course not, but, as a matter of record, it is a stat that is only assigned to the QB individually among players and to the team as a whole and to the head coach.

If we were in the Kansas City forum I don't imagine there would be any argument about whether or not Mahomes was a contributing factor to their success. But because this is Niner Talk and there is a small, but dedicated subset of posters, whose sole purpose in life seems to be denying that Jimmy Garappolo has contributed ANYTHING AT ALL to the teams success since he's been here, this ridiculous argument has become a thing that someone felt was worthy of its own thread.

I am all about stats and player evaluation but player win% isn't very high on my list. People always like to bring up Jimmy's win% to defend Jimmy and Kyle's win% without Jimmy to degrade Kyle. It has gone on for atleast 3 years up until now. What you never see is folks bring up the teams win% when Bosa isn't playing. Which is almost as bad as the teams win% without Jimmy. Should elite pass rushers be recognized for their win% as well?

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

That's not the question though. The question is, are wins a QB stat? The simple answer is, yes they are because, as far as I know it is a player metric that is only used by the NFL, who I think we can all agree are the final arbiters of how stats are recorded for their league, for one position, and that's the QB. It's not a WR stat or a LB stat or a kicker stat. Does that mean that the QB is solely responsible for whether or not a team wins or loses? Of course not, but, as a matter of record, it is a stat that is only assigned to the QB individually among players and to the team as a whole and to the head coach.

If we were in the Kansas City forum I don't imagine there would be any argument about whether or not Mahomes was a contributing factor to their success. But because this is Niner Talk and there is a small, but dedicated subset of posters, whose sole purpose in life seems to be denying that Jimmy Garappolo has contributed ANYTHING AT ALL to the teams success since he's been here, this ridiculous argument has become a thing that someone felt was worthy of its own thread.

I am all about stats and player evaluation but player win% isn't very high on my list. People always like to bring up Jimmy's win% to defend Jimmy and Kyle's win% without Jimmy to degrade Kyle. It has gone on for atleast 3 years up until now. What you never see is folks bring up the teams win% when Bosa isn't playing. Which is almost as bad as the teams win% without Jimmy. Should elite pass rushers be recognized for their win% as well?

And that's fine, up to a point. I think the problems begin when people start to use stats, some of which I think are lacking in any real relevance, to constantly try and parse who is responsible to what specific percentage of a team's win and loss record. As I indicated above, I think a lot of this talk originated just as an excuse for some people to find more ways to denigrate Jimmy's contributions to the team and to try and justify their arguments that Kyle and the defense have been "carrying him" for the last five years and that he doesn't make any contribution to the team that any moderately competent QB couldn't also make. I reject that argument on its face and have no respect for the opinion of the people who are constantly trying to make it.

That being said, I am also perfectly willing to acknowledge that Jimmy has to share the burden of some of their losses, in just the same way he deserves credit for his contributions to their wins. The Titan's loss last year was largely due to his poor play. His contributions to the last Green Bay game were pretty much limited to that final drive or two which mostly involved keeping the ball out of Rodger's hands. But, unlike some others, I don't think it's fair to blame him for the first loss that year. He put the team in a position to win it with time running out on the clock and the kicker didn't do his job. It goes like that sometimes.

However, I think it also worth pointing out that, regardless of how anyone in here may feel about the matter, the fact remains that the NFL who has been responsible for compiling the league's records, probably since its inception, has decided that wins and losses, as a metric, should be assigned to QB's, coaches, and teams. That is simply an inarguable fact. If people want to spend a bunch of time "debating" the merits of that approach they are certainly free to take it up with the NFL. As I also noted though, I very seriously doubt that this is a conversation they are having in any Chief's fan forums and the root of it in this forum is just people looking for ways to slam Jimmy under the guise of "talking football". Not saying this applies to you specifically but just as a kind of thing in general among some others.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

YAC just locked this thread up ..boom

NFL.com approves.

I mean, if it's a stat kept somewhere then it is a stat. If it is listed under QBs, then it is a QB stat. But that's both irrelevant for the purposes of evaluating a QB, and not the point of most debates (here and elsewhere).

The debates stem from how much a QB (or goalie in the NHL, pitcher in MLB, etc.) has to do with the win...or the loss. And while there are the odd individuals who use the result metric to solely define an individual player's performance in a team sport, the overwhelming majority of people use the result as one variable among many others in order to determine a player's individual success / worth / impact, in a team sport.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

YAC just locked this thread up ..boom

NFL.com approves.

it does not, but you do you

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If it's the sole argument made for why a QB should be considered a great player, than no. If it is used along with other QB performance accolades, than fine. You can reference it.

That's not the question though. The question is, are wins a QB stat? The simple answer is, yes they are because, as far as I know it is a player metric that is only used by the NFL, who I think we can all agree are the final arbiters of how stats are recorded for their league, for one position, and that's the QB. It's not a WR stat or a LB stat or a kicker stat. Does that mean that the QB is solely responsible for whether or not a team wins or loses? Of course not, but, as a matter of record, it is a stat that is only assigned to the QB individually among players and to the team as a whole and to the head coach.

If we were in the Kansas City forum I don't imagine there would be any argument about whether or not Mahomes was a contributing factor to their success. But because this is Niner Talk and there is a small, but dedicated subset of posters, whose sole purpose in life seems to be denying that Jimmy Garappolo has contributed ANYTHING AT ALL to the teams success since he's been here, this ridiculous argument has become a thing that someone felt was worthy of its own thread.

I am all about stats and player evaluation but player win% isn't very high on my list. People always like to bring up Jimmy's win% to defend Jimmy and Kyle's win% without Jimmy to degrade Kyle. It has gone on for atleast 3 years up until now. What you never see is folks bring up the teams win% when Bosa isn't playing. Which is almost as bad as the teams win% without Jimmy. Should elite pass rushers be recognized for their win% as well?

And that's fine, up to a point. I think the problems begin when people start to use stats, some of which I think are lacking in any real relevance, to constantly try and parse who is responsible to what specific percentage of a team's win and loss record. As I indicated above, I think a lot of this talk originated just as an excuse for some people to find more ways to denigrate Jimmy's contributions to the team and to try and justify their arguments that Kyle and the defense have been "carrying him" for the last five years and that he doesn't make any contribution to the team that any moderately competent QB couldn't also make. I reject that argument on its face and have no respect for the opinion of the people who are constantly trying to make it.

That being said, I am also perfectly willing to acknowledge that Jimmy has to share the burden of some of their losses, in just the same way he deserves credit for his contributions to their wins. The Titan's loss last year was largely due to his poor play. His contributions to the last Green Bay game were pretty much limited to that final drive or two which mostly involved keeping the ball out of Rodger's hands. But, unlike some others, I don't think it's fair to blame him for the first loss that year. He put the team in a position to win it with time running out on the clock and the kicker didn't do his job. It goes like that sometimes.

However, I think it also worth pointing out that, regardless of how anyone in here may feel about the matter, the fact remains that the NFL who has been responsible for compiling the league's records, probably since its inception, has decided that wins and losses, as a metric, should be assigned to QB's, coaches, and teams. That is simply an inarguable fact. If people want to spend a bunch of time "debating" the merits of that approach they are certainly free to take it up with the NFL. As I also noted though, I very seriously doubt that this is a conversation they are having in any Chief's fan forums and the root of it in this forum is just people looking for ways to slam Jimmy under the guise of "talking football". Not saying this applies to you specifically but just as a kind of thing in general among some others.

This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy when we were winning and put all the blame on Kyle when we lossed. I guess you missed all the "Kyle can't win without Jimmy", "What's Kyle's record without Jimmy?" Posts?

Guess what? This offense finally looks like a juggernaut now that we have a QB that can hit ALL areas of the field on time and with accuracy. We no longer need to expect the defense to hold playoff level offenses to under 17 ppg in order to give ourselves a chance at a Lombardi.

If you want to believe that Jimmy deserves a majority of the praise for the teams success than fine. But like I said, the teams record without Bosa is nearly as bad as it is without Jimmy barring these last 7 games.