Are Wins a QB stat?

I'm glad we resolved this one ....

.

It's a stat, but it's not a good one to use. Good teams can win games with mediocre QBs. We haven't lost to Rodgers in the playoffs and we never had a better QB than him.

Majority of the time it is about the QB, so I see why the stat came about, but a mediocre QB in the right situation can rack up a lot of wins.

Thanks thl; hopefully this garbage argument stays here and out of the QB threads

Originally posted by Polkadots:
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 YACBros85:
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.

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
It's a stat, but it's not a good one to use. Good teams can win games with mediocre QBs. We haven't lost to Rodgers in the playoffs and we never had a better QB than him.

Majority of the time it is about the QB, so I see why the stat came about, but a mediocre QB in the right situation can rack up a lot of wins.

I'll say it. We witnessed this first hand and the reason this thread exists is because of Jimmy and all HE does is wins. He's the definition of a mediocre QB that can rack up wins

Originally posted by Polkadots:
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.

I disagree about this. Do you have any idea how many debates happened over the course of the last few years that one side's major point was "Jimmy just wins"?

That was the driving force behind the over the top Jimmy fans' argument.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Polkadots:

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.

I disagree about this. Do you have any idea how many debates happened over the course of the last few years that one side's major point was "Jimmy just wins"?

That was the driving force behind the over the top Jimmy fans' argument.

It was a good argument in defense of Shanahan's decision to stick with Jimmy because it was working with the two.

Anyone could win in this system and on this team is a terrible counter argument. We are seeing it in the Brock thread now.

Originally posted by boast:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by boast:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by boast:
i believe the debate was "are Wins a QB stat"

the NFL record book appears to prove that they are a QB stat.

Thanks, edited.

If we acknowledge they are an official stat kept by the NFL why is this even an open question for debate? It's settled.

a coffee table book is not official. if it was official it would be on the site..there is a reason why they don't include it

a coffee table book hahahahah. it's a PDF. the NFL made it easily searchable posting it that way.

and it's on the NFL site. and even more specifically it's the operations.nfl.com site.

https://operations.nfl.com/updates/the-game/2022-nfl-record-and-fact-book/

it's a kids book.. there is a reason why you have to download it . parody

you really have no idea what youre talking about. it's downloadable because it's over 700 pages.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

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.

That's not what I am saying at all. In fact, I don't believe I have ever once made that argument in here. My position is that during his time here Jimmy has made a legitimate contribution to the team's success and I am willing to defend him on that basis. Is he the only reason they win? Of course not. Is he an elite QB by the standard that most people seem to measure those things by, no probably not. But he is CAPABLE of playing at an extremely high level and when he does he helps the team win more than he causes them to lose. I also appreciate the leadership and professionalism he has shown during his time here and the positive impact that has had on helping shape the culture of the team, which I believe have both made a contribution to the team's overall success and shouldn't be taken lightly or dismissed as being unimportant.

Now the clock is running down on his time here and that's okay. I'm sorry he didn't get the chance to redeem his Super Bowl loss but that's the way it goes. I'm thrilled about Purdy's emergence and am rooting for him to bring the Lombardi Trophy back to the Bay. That doesn't cause me to appreciate Jimmy's contributions less or feel like I have to constantly rip him because he missed that throw to Sanders which, to be perfectly honest, is what I think all of the drama about him boils down to. There is a certain type of "fan" who will never forgive him for that and to me that's their problem, not his. Go Niners!

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

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.

That's not what I am saying at all. In fact, I don't believe I have ever once made that argument in here. My position is that during his time here Jimmy has made a legitimate contribution to the team's success and I am willing to defend him on that basis. Is he the only reason they win? Of course not. Is he an elite QB by the standard that most people seem to measure those things by, no probably not. But he is CAPABLE of playing at an extremely high level and when he does he helps the team win more than he causes them to lose. I also appreciate the leadership and professionalism he has shown during his time here and the positive impact that has had on helping shape the culture of the team, which I believe have both made a contribution to the team's overall success and shouldn't be taken lightly or dismissed as being unimportant.

Now the clock is running down on his time here and that's okay. I'm sorry he didn't get the chance to redeem his Super Bowl loss but that's the way it goes. I'm thrilled about Purdy's emergence and am rooting for him to bring the Lombardi Trophy back to the Bay. That doesn't cause me to appreciate Jimmy's contributions less or feel like I have to constantly rip him because he missed that throw to Sanders which, to be perfectly honest, is what I think all of the drama about him boils down to. There is a certain type of "fan" who will never forgive him for that and to me that's their problem, not his. Go Niners!

I never once said that Jimmy shouldn't get any credit for the success of the team. Of course the QB should get credit. But he shouldn't get all of the credit.This debate is supposed to be about whether wins are a QB stat or not. I am fine with that as long as it applies to other players who are just as impactful when it comes to winning games. Players like Bosa.

A quarterbacks success is a profound determinant factor in a teams success. More so than any other position on a team in any sport outside of a pitcher, whom isn't available every game in a season. Leadership is an unquantifiable tangible that factors in every game. Sometimes it isn't about making the splash play, but putting the team in the best position to win the game. Knowing your limits within the offense. Minimizing mistakes and mitigating damage by protecting the ball is huge. With that said, Purdy seems to have the best of both worlds. He is able to take shots down field without risking turnovers, he is mobile and gutsy enough to extend the play. He's not throwing 70 yard bombs on a dime, but he is playing like an evolved version of Montana. I don't know any other way to describe it. I have trouble finding another quality comparison. Maybe a mobile Kurt Warner or Drew Brees with better wheels? These are the best comparisons I have been able to come up with. I would say a quarterbacks success can make or break a team, and you can rarely win a Super Bowl without a quality quarterback. Trent Dilfer is the worst quarterback I've seen win a superbowl, and it took a record breaking defensive effort with a 2k rusher to accomplish that. Total outlier

Before we can answer that question we must ask What is a QB and what is a stat?

Originally posted by DRCHOWDER:
Before we can answer that question we must ask What is a QB and what is a stat?

is QB a stat ?

"QB wins as a starter" is a stat.

"QB wins as a backup that played" is a stat.

Hell, even "QB wins as a non-participant" exists as a stat.

But if some are obsessed with Wins and Losses from one participant, here are some Win totals they might like and how they compare to NFL Wins.