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 Furlow:
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
per ESPN
Garoppolo taking snaps will be a decidedly different look for Las Vegas. He's replacing Derek Carr, the Raiders' starter since his rookie season of 2014, and Carr only missed two regular-season starts because of injury in his career.
But Garoppolo is also expected to give the Raiders' offense, which was the NFL's No. 12-ranked unit last season (No. 11 passing, No. 17 rushing, No. 12 scoring), not only a fresh start, but a kickstart, given his familiarity with McDaniels and the scheme and the discomfort Carr had in said system.
Consider: Garoppolo's passer rating as a starter with McDaniels calling plays is 119.0 compared to Carr's 86.3.
But passer rating doesn't matter. Air yards, fantasy football points, and SportsCenter Top Ten Plays are what win games.
Completed air yards per attempt is part of why Jimmy makes way less than Derek Carr. Despite your (and TreyDey's) denial, throwing short to YAC monsters is easier than throwing down the field to regular WRs.
Filter by completed air yards per attempt and scan through. Please show me the correlation to winning. It doesn't exist. The best QB in the NFL (Mahomes) ranked 16th in that "stat" last year.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2022/passing_advanced.htm
Just because they are called "advanced stats," doesn't mean they carry any significance to winning football games.
That's because winning is a team effort. Sometimes teams win because their QB does most of the work. Sometimes teams win because they have a lot of studs on offense and the QB is a cog in the machine.
For example, look what happened when Tua went down in Miami. Their offense fell off a cliff (I believe they went to 16 points per game or so). Look what happened when Jimmy went down in San Francisco. The offense went from 22 points per game to 32 points per game. Brock Purdy completed air yards per completoin: 5.9. Jimmy: 4.8.
This argument is terrible lol. Purdy is better than Jimmy. Tua's backup is worse than Tua. That's all that proves.
Now go look at passer rating rankings, and you'll see a much higher correlation to winning. That's the issue here. Those of us who appreciate Jimmy can see that what he does helps win games. The small number of you who don't just want to see cool highlights.
So far, Purdy has provided both, let's hope that continues.
Passer rating is a TEAM STAT. Of course it's going to correlate with winning. Every single good thing about a QB in passer rating also is a good thing about the receivers, and there's literally no way to distinguish who is more at fault or deserving of praise for each pass included in the metric, because the metric doesn't distinguish between contributions to passer or pass receiver. Hence why Total QBR is better. As is Next Gen Stats. And so on.
Lol right. If passer rating is a TEAM STAT then every stat is a TEAM STAT. Terrible argument. Next.
To a degree most are. But some less so than others. For example, yards per completion versus completed air yards per completion. The former has LITERALLY ZERO means of distinguishing between what the receiver contributed and what the QB does. The latter shows that the QB is at least responsible for how far the ball traveled. The pass may have been inaccurate, he may have thrown under pressure, and so on. But we have MORE information about his contribution with that stat than we do with yards per completion, in which a WR catching a pass behind the line and running for a 12 yard gain is indistinguishable from a pass thrown 12 yards through the air.
Other stats, such as QBR and various other advanced metrics, painstakingly look at the context of each play to determine how much contribution from each player likely went into the play. The problem with QBR is ESPN hiding some of how the stats are weighted, but EPA and so on are fairly accessible.
But passer rating? It gives you LITERALLY ZERO information about how much is on the QB and how much is on the receivers. None. None at all. That at best gives it a large margin of error in evaluating QB play, but a very accurate evaluation of team passing offense.
Passer rating gives ZERO information about how much is on the QB. I have heard it all now.
