Are Wins a QB stat?

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
Marino was awesome, his teams weren't

end of story

can lock thread now

DM SB record 0-1, He's def not successful

He ranks top 10 in QB wins and his percentage is better than Brees. Even looking only at wins.. which I don't recommend.. he's still highly successful.

like i said calling Jimmy successful is an opinion

This is why QB thread get locked. You brought up Jimmy out of nowhere for no reason.

lol, this thread is about jimmy or there wouldn't be a need to make this thread.

This thread came put of the Brock thread, people were commenting about how wins are meaningless when Brock's record was brought up.

it was brought up not because of Brock, but all the WL record arguments prior to Brock. in no way did the W/L record take was Birthed in the Brock thread

Originally posted by YACBros85:
This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I was just thinking. If Purdy wins the SB, h

Nah people used the stat because even you admit it's a QB stat. The only reason you say it's not is because it completely diminished the years you all wrongfully spent diminishing J*. Let's be honest here.

Big Jimmy fan here but he did lose us the SB and also the NFCC.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
Marino was awesome, his teams weren't

end of story

can lock thread now

DM SB record 0-1, He's def not successful

He ranks top 10 in QB wins and his percentage is better than Brees. Even looking only at wins.. which I don't recommend.. he's still highly successful.

like i said calling Jimmy successful is an opinion

This is why QB thread get locked. You brought up Jimmy out of nowhere for no reason.

lol, this thread is about jimmy or there wouldn't be a need to make this thread.

This thread came put of the Brock thread, people were commenting about how wins are meaningless when Brock's record was brought up.

it was brought up not because of Brock, but all the WL record arguments prior to Brock. in no way did the W/L record take was Birthed in the Brock thread

It started here

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I was just thinking. If Purdy wins the SB, h

Nah people used the stat because even you admit it's a QB stat. The only reason you say it's not is because it completely diminished the years you all wrongfully spent diminishing J*. Let's be honest here.

Big Jimmy fan here but he did lose us the SB and also the NFCC.

Yes. I used the phrase, if Purdy wins. You got me. Dude, don't you know what a turn of phrase is? I am not saying it is not a stat. It just isn't a stat I use when evaluating player performance and not a stat I track or record.

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I was just thinking. If Purdy wins the SB, h

Nah people used the stat because even you admit it's a QB stat. The only reason you say it's not is because it completely diminished the years you all wrongfully spent diminishing J*. Let's be honest here.

Big Jimmy fan here but he did lose us the SB and also the NFCC.

While i think it wasn't Jimmys fault for the SB, most of the games he won wasn't due to him. especially his playoff wins.. but since the Team won... people want to pretend they won because of him. Most of his wins are like this..which is both true and false

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I was just thinking. If Purdy wins the SB, h

Nah people used the stat because even you admit it's a QB stat. The only reason you say it's not is because it completely diminished the years you all wrongfully spent diminishing J*. Let's be honest here.

Big Jimmy fan here but he did lose us the SB and also the NFCC.

Yes. I used the phrase, if Purdy wins. You got me. Dude, don't you know what a turn of phrase is? But it certainly isn't a stat I use when evaluating player performance and not a stat I track or record.

More like a Freudian slip. Purdy wins games but others don't. Proof of a double standard.

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
This whole thing came about because the extreme Jimmy defenders used that stat to pump up Jimmy

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I was just thinking. If Purdy wins the SB, h

Nah people used the stat because even you admit it's a QB stat. The only reason you say it's not is because it completely diminished the years you all wrongfully spent diminishing J*. Let's be honest here.

Big Jimmy fan here but he did lose us the SB and also the NFCC.

Yes. I used the phrase, if Purdy wins. You got me. Dude, don't you know what a turn of phrase is? But it certainly isn't a stat I use when evaluating player performance and not a stat I track or record.

More like a Freudian slip. Purdy wins games but others don't. Proof of a double standard.

That double standard is black and white.. Purdy is actually winning us games.. he's not on just for the ride

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
.. Purdy is actually winning us games..

/Thread

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.

"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 lose*"



Examples:

1. "Bill Bellichick without Brady: 62-74
Packers without Rodgers since he took over: 6-11-1
Sean Payton without Drew Brees: 8-3 (17-11 if you include this season)
Kyle without Jimmy: 6-24"

2. "I challenge you and any Jimmy hater to find any team and/or coach with as drastic of a swing in W/L record when their starter is down."

3. "Agreed. why do we always suck when hes not available? theres a reason his team loves him"

4. "49ers record with Jimmy G.
49ers record without Jimmy G.
Proves you wrong."

5. "4 - 1 Playoffs record all time.
Big time winner in the regular season.
2nd NFC Championship appearance in 3 seasons.
1 prior Super Bowl appearance.
WZ still complaining."

6. "What is the winning percentage of Hoyer, Beathard, and Mullens when they played QB for the 49ers again? Just asking for a friend.

7. "But facts are facts, and facts don't care about your feelings: Our QB, in 2 seasons when he has played the majority of the games, has taken us to 2 NFC Championships."

8. "unpopular opinion - the only stat that matters is W/L."

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
Marino was awesome, his teams weren't

end of story

can lock thread now

DM SB record 0-1, He's def not successful

He ranks top 10 in QB wins and his percentage is better than Brees. Even looking only at wins.. which I don't recommend.. he's still highly successful.

like i said calling Jimmy successful is an opinion

Jimmy LIVES in your dome lol. He was talking about Dan Marino.

This isn't about Jimmy. I made that point to show that stats collectively tell the story, not by themselves individually. Jimmy being the 6th highest rated passer of all-time does not mean he's the 6th best or even close. Nor does wins. But W/L is still a QB stat no matter how you slice it. Per NFL.com too.

where on NFL.com ?

Page 302
https://operations.nfl.com/media/6101/2022-record-and-fact-book.pdf

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
.. Purdy is actually winning us games..

/Thread

still not getting it huh

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
Marino was awesome, his teams weren't

end of story

can lock thread now

DM SB record 0-1, He's def not successful

He ranks top 10 in QB wins and his percentage is better than Brees. Even looking only at wins.. which I don't recommend.. he's still highly successful.

like i said calling Jimmy successful is an opinion

Jimmy LIVES in your dome lol. He was talking about Dan Marino.

This isn't about Jimmy. I made that point to show that stats collectively tell the story, not by themselves individually. Jimmy being the 6th highest rated passer of all-time does not mean he's the 6th best or even close. Nor does wins. But W/L is still a QB stat no matter how you slice it. Per NFL.com too.

where on NFL.com ?

Page 302
https://operations.nfl.com/media/6101/2022-record-and-fact-book.pdf

This is https://www.nfl.com/

not some fun facts and learn about football, you should print that out and grab some crayons lol

Originally posted by Waterbear:
"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 lose*"



Examples:

1. "Bill Bellichick without Brady: 62-74
Packers without Rodgers since he took over: 6-11-1
Sean Payton without Drew Brees: 8-3 (17-11 if you include this season)
Kyle without Jimmy: 6-24"

2. "I challenge you and any Jimmy hater to find any team and/or coach with as drastic of a swing in W/L record when their starter is down."

3. "Agreed. why do we always suck when hes not available? theres a reason his team loves him"

4. "49ers record with Jimmy G.
49ers record without Jimmy G.
Proves you wrong."

5. "4 - 1 Playoffs record all time.
Big time winner in the regular season.
2nd NFC Championship appearance in 3 seasons.
1 prior Super Bowl appearance.
WZ still complaining."

6. "What is the winning percentage of Hoyer, Beathard, and Mullens when they played QB for the 49ers again? Just asking for a friend.

7. "But facts are facts, and facts don't care about your feelings: Our QB, in 2 seasons when he has played the majority of the games, has taken us to 2 NFC Championships."

8. "unpopular opinion - the only stat that matters is W/L."

/thread

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by ItsX4Number6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
.. Purdy is actually winning us games..

/Thread

still not getting it huh

You just admitted flat out "Purdy(the QB) is actually WINNING US GAMES".

You're just being a huge hypocrite. I get it completely. Unlike you I just don't flip flop and change stances based off complete bias.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

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.

"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 lose*"



Examples:

1. "Bill Bellichick without Brady: 62-74
Packers without Rodgers since he took over: 6-11-1
Sean Payton without Drew Brees: 8-3 (17-11 if you include this season)
Kyle without Jimmy: 6-24"

2. "I challenge you and any Jimmy hater to find any team and/or coach with as drastic of a swing in W/L record when their starter is down."

3. "Agreed. why do we always suck when hes not available? theres a reason his team loves him"

4. "49ers record with Jimmy G.
49ers record without Jimmy G.
Proves you wrong."

5. "4 - 1 Playoffs record all time.
Big time winner in the regular season.
2nd NFC Championship appearance in 3 seasons.
1 prior Super Bowl appearance.
WZ still complaining."

6. "What is the winning percentage of Hoyer, Beathard, and Mullens when they played QB for the 49ers again? Just asking for a friend.

7. "But facts are facts, and facts don't care about your feelings: Our QB, in 2 seasons when he has played the majority of the games, has taken us to 2 NFC Championships."

8. "unpopular opinion - the only stat that matters is W/L."

So basically the team won a bunch of games with JG starting and it made some folks miffed cuz they didn't feel he was as good as his record indicated. Would that be a fair statement?