QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
It is subjective, probably determined by kids making $20/hr to watch games and judge if a play was turnover-worthy.

So throwing into double coverage, throwing a blatant inaccurate ball or misreading a coverage…isn't bad?

PFF actually goes though multiple layers of grading as well. I'm sure there's subjectivity in it, but tossing it to the trash because you don't like the results doesn't make it wrong. Almost 50% of their TWP were actually INTS.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
It is subjective, probably determined by kids making $20/hr to watch games and judge if a play was turnover-worthy.

More playing with words, as something being subjective doesn't make it any less real.


Can I definitively say that Tartt dropped a turnover-worthy pass here? Or is that too much for the forum to handle?

Stafford has been near the top in TWP throws many yrs.

Originally posted by Midbay:
It is almost impossible to talk as much as that twerp and not occasionally say something someone will agree with. Doesn't excuse you bringing him into the thread though... with a video no less.

I brought it in here, film is film it's not like Grant deep faked these plays. Who cares who posts it? I don't have all-22. This play wouldn't be any different if Grant or Jonny posted it.

Originally posted by thl408:
It all goes back to how we want to digest football. Yes, in the end, wins and losses is what truly matters. Some fans like myself enjoy peeling back the layers to understand why and how a play/team/player is successful or unsuccessful. Game highlights get old quick for me so I want more detailed, low level stats and analysis.

I think it comes down to what the data shows and who's supports who blah blah blah…I'm sure if Brock's TWPR was the lowest in the league, the same people poo pooing on it would love to talk about it. I'd bet money they'd love to talk about it if Lance was awful there.

IMO people calling it nothing more than subjective are being subjective themselves because they don't like the results of the data.

it's just another data point that actually does have a significant correlation year after year with throwing INTs. It's not the end of the world, he's a young rookie who should improve. I do think people need to pump the brakes a little with all the Brees comps, he's our FQB and Lance needs to be traded talk.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Yeah, I agree. He had some solid talent at RB and WR - some are in the nfl, but the talent disparity after those guys was awful. It's why it's so impressive that he won as many games as he did, it's not an easy task to constantly pull off upsets.

Talent wise they were usually overmatched. They've had some good RBs there, some decent TEs and WEs, the OL was often a liability and against much better teams, Purdy pretty much had to go nuts in order for the Cyclones to stay in the game.

Appreciate all the college context, fellas.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by FunkyChicken:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Take the 45 yard Adams catch in the raiders game. It was ruled a catch. We all know that ball hit the ground but there wasn't a camera angle that gave the officials indisputable evidence to overrule the original call. He gets credited with a catch for 45 yards. You are saying that his stats are objective because of how that particular play was ruled. But its subjective because we can
explain why it wasn't a catch because neither one of his hands or arms were underneath that ball. Just because a stat is counted on the score sheet doesn't mean its not subjective and up for debate.

You are wrong. It's not debatable whether that play counted or not. It objectively counted, which is THL's point. All you can say is it shouldn't have counted, yet it objectively did. For example in Jeopardy if they asked Adams yardage for the game and you deducted that catch you would be buzzed as giving the wrong answer. Objectively so.

But we aren't on jeopardy and there is room for debate on that play whether you want to be a part of that debate or not.

I am guessing you folks don't spend a lot of time on various stat sites? None of them are identical when it comes to recorded stats. Those "objective stats" vary to some degree from site to site.

I think I see the issue now you guys were having as I updated myself more thoroughly on a comp.

It's simply that you guys are talking past each other instead of TO each other in regards to what's meant while using a language as complex as English.

The terms that THL is speaking in, the terms objective and subjective are antonyms, and there simply is no debate about being one or the other.

In this context, INTs, for example, cannot be subjective. In fact, they are the opposite of subjective.

Problem is the context wasn't made clear on this and English has words with multiple meanings. Even I missed some of this earlier when I admitted that virtually all stats can subjective to a degree,...some more than others. That's because I was referring to definition #2 below...instead of the #4 tense spoken in above that is clearly an opposite.



So in a way, it's impossible for INT stats to be subjective. But then again, given how closely I can say INTs influence or correlate to the "essential being" of winning games, I can certainly say INTs are subjective.

I mean are confusables all over the place in this language. Isin't it fun?

The INT stat itself is objective because it stands and will forever be counted on that players stat sheet. The stat is also subjective because of reasons that can be debated over who was at fault for the INT. That is where the stat TWP comes into play. It attempts to place fault on the QB for plays that were and leave out plays that were not.

Originally posted by Dshearn:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
this TOWP stat can be useful to people who don't watch all the games

What does this stat tell you about Brock if you have not watched any games?

What does the stat tell you if his TOWP goes from 2.8% to 4.8% ?

Now

Would you change your mind, if I told you that the difference in the two stats was a 4th down deep throw 50/50 type ball that the coach called in place of a punt because of down/distance and weather? The defense not intercepting the ball would have been better for the team then intercepting it.

1 play should not weigh very heavy in the course of a season.

As far as a 50/50 ball. If the pass is underthrown and gives the DB a better shot at making a play, it should absolutely be chalked up as a TWP. You are attempting to come up with hypothetical scenarios without even knowing how PFF even tallies them.

Your last sentence has nothing to do with evaluating the QB's performance. Who cares how the play affected the other team. We aren't evaluating the other team so it is a moot point in the context of the debate.

Originally posted by tankle104:
Just to throw some gas on this… hahaha Geno Smith had 2-3 EASY EASY pics that we dropped - hit us right in the bread basket.
Should his pro bowl be stripped?

You tell me. It's opinion.

Originally posted by Furlow:
I agree with your analysis of the play but no need to throw shade at Jimmy like that lol.

He told me he's stopped reading the forum anyway since our last SB. It's cool.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Just to throw some gas on this… hahaha Geno Smith had 2-3 EASY EASY pics that we dropped - hit us right in the bread basket.
Should his pro bowl be stripped?

You tell me. It's opinion.

I enjoy data and use it daily in my career to make decisions. I love sifting through data and analyzing - but it's also just as dangerous as it is awesome. With PFF/AWS etc - the amount of data available today is EXPONENTIALLY more than ever before, which is awesome. We can analyze things and break them down in a granular fashion.

with that said, i don't understand these kind of debates on here. They seem unproductive.

I believe that an overwhelming majority of us will support and ride with whoever is our QB. Obviously, some on here and just trolls, but most of us just want our team to succeed and whoever it is at QB - it is.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Yeah, I agree. He had some solid talent at RB and WR - some are in the nfl, but the talent disparity after those guys was awful. It's why it's so impressive that he won as many games as he did, it's not an easy task to constantly pull off upsets.

Talent wise they were usually overmatched. They've had some good RBs there, some decent TEs and WEs, the OL was often a liability and against much better teams, Purdy pretty much had to go nuts in order for the Cyclones to stay in the game.

Appreciate all the college context, fellas.

No problem, NC! The biggest knock I have come across, albeit I haven't done a ton of in-depth research, is that he would try to "make a play" and try to make up for the lack of talent on his team. This would result in him making some really big blunders and costing games.

the interesting part is that he was a core reason they were winning games and competing in games in the first place, he just didn't have the overall help to get his team elevated to the next level, so he would take it upon himself and it wasn't always pretty.

i think it's reassuring that he keeps bringing up how he doesn't have to carry the team, not everything is on his shoulders.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

It is subjective, probably determined by kids making $20/hr to watch games and judge if a play was turnover-worthy.

So throwing into double coverage, throwing a blatant inaccurate ball or misreading a coverage…isn't bad?

PFF actually goes though multiple layers of grading as well. I'm sure there's subjectivity in it, but tossing it to the trash because you don't like the results doesn't make it wrong. Almost 50% of their TWP were actually INTS.

Sometimes throwing into double coverage isn't bad, sometimes it is.
The problem is with where to draw the line.
I have no idea what the "results" are of what other unknown people deem to be TOWP or First Down Worthy Plays or Reception Worthy Plays or Touchdown Worthy Plays because I dismiss them.
I use my eyes and statistics to evaluate 49er QBs.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by thl408:

It all goes back to how we want to digest football. Yes, in the end, wins and losses is what truly matters. Some fans like myself enjoy peeling back the layers to understand why and how a play/team/player is successful or unsuccessful. Game highlights get old quick for me so I want more detailed, low level stats and analysis.

I think it comes down to what the data shows and who's supports who blah blah blah…I'm sure if Brock's TWPR was the lowest in the league, the same people poo pooing on it would love to talk about it. I'd bet money they'd love to talk about it if Lance was awful there.

IMO people calling it nothing more than subjective are being subjective themselves because they don't like the results of the data.

it's just another data point that actually does have a significant correlation year after year with throwing INTs. It's not the end of the world, he's a young rookie who should improve. I do think people need to pump the brakes a little with all the Brees comps, he's our FQB and Lance needs to be traded talk.

Yes, and you are a string advocate of benching Brock for Trey next year.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
It is subjective, probably determined by kids making $20/hr to watch games and judge if a play was turnover-worthy.

So throwing into double coverage, throwing a blatant inaccurate ball or misreading a coverage…isn't bad?

PFF actually goes though multiple layers of grading as well. I'm sure there's subjectivity in it, but tossing it to the trash because you don't like the results doesn't make it wrong. Almost 50% of their TWP were actually INTS.

Sometimes throwing into double coverage isn't bad, sometimes it is.
The problem is with where to draw the line.
I have no idea what the "results" are of what other unknown people deem to be TOWP or First Down Worthy Plays or Reception Worthy Plays or Touchdown Worthy Plays because I dismiss them.
I use my eyes and statistics to evaluate 49er QBs.

So does every other fan who is interested in player evaluation. The individual fan is always biased in which stats they choose to accept and ignore depending on how they feel about each individual player.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
The INT stat itself is objective because it stands and will forever be counted on that players stat sheet. The stat is also subjective because of reasons that can be debated over who was at fault for the INT. That is where the stat TWP comes into play. It attempts to place fault on the QB for plays that were and leave out plays that were not.

Yea the point is, you 2 were discussing it in completely different definitions that do not relate to each other.

In the context of what THL is saying, it's not in any way subjective. It's completely objective and this isin't debatable.