Jump to content

New NFL passing metric used to analyze playoff QBs, SHOCKING RESULTS INSIDE


TheBukafax

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have that Tannehill pic with the Oilers logo as my screen saver and just rubbed one out to it 

Some key quotes   ”Tannehill and his fourth-ranked 89 NGS Passing Score undoubtedly was key to the Titans' ability to survive their injuries.”   “Tannehill was an above-average pas

https://www.nfl.com/news/ranking-the-14-playoff-quarterbacks-based-on-ngs-new-passing-score-metric?campaign=Twitter_atn   The Next Gen Stats crew has created a new metric/algorithm to analyz

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

 

I was thinking RB screens.

Ah. I was thinking more about WR screens as IMO they're the hallmarks of an "easy" offense. WR screens, RPO's, and tons of half-field reads on roll-outs are the things the typify a lot of "easy" offenses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

 

The first graphic is the NGS one correlation only.   Second graphic is the comparison of their metric to PFF and QBR in terms of team success. 

 

I'm certain I'm still confused about something.

 

The first graphic shows that if your NGS rating was 95 or greater, 80% of those guys made the playoffs. A rainy of 90 to 94 was 63% and so on.

 

If I take the midpoint of each of those rating buckets and use the percent that made the playoffs, I get a correlation of 0.92 or 0.93. Not exact but that's the ballpark of how correlated they are, right?

 

Does not the second graphic say that there's only a correlation of 0.52 for NGS rating and making the playoffs?

 

0.92 and 0.52 are very different.

 

Again, I'm sure I've got a mind block on something ... but what is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

 

I'm certain I'm still confused about something.

 

The first graphic shows that if your NGS rating was 95 or greater, 80% of those guys made the playoffs. A rainy of 90 to 94 was 63% and so on.

 

If I take the midpoint of each of those rating buckets and use the percent that made the playoffs, I get a correlation of 0.92 or 0.93. Not exact but that's the ballpark of how correlated they are, right?

 

Does not the second graphic say that there's only a correlation of 0.52 for NGS rating and making the playoffs?

 

0.92 and 0.52 are very different.

 

Again, I'm sure I've got a mind block on something ... but what is it?

 

The first graphic looks at grade levels of a QB and then directly correlates it to W/L in the regular season and in the playoffs for the 4 seasons they scored.   There would be some teams that have a winning record but don't make the playoffs and we've seen .500 or worse teams win a bad division too.  Also because the seasons # equates to instances, you have to weight them accordingly.

 

The second graphic looks at the QB scores aggregate and correlates it to win %, team making the playoffs, winning record, year to year stability for the 4 seasons they used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

Screens almost doubled this year from last.  6.3% of passes in 2020 (24th overall) to 11.4% of passes in 2021 (10th overall).  I do think some of that was a product of the receiver injuries - it seems like we saw a lot more % wise when the receivers were down but it was a tweak from Smith to Downing too.

 

Interesting... didn't realize they jumped to 10th. I agree some of that is due to the lack of WR targets over the course of the season but it doesn't account for all of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

Interesting... didn't realize they jumped to 10th. I agree some of that is due to the lack of WR targets over the course of the season but it doesn't account for all of it.

 

I went back and looked.  It was up and down all year depending on the opponent.  It's more of a Downing tweak than injury related based on the data.  IMO, it was done in part to mitigate the loss of Jonnu and my guess is that Evans was pegged for a big role here but he flamed out.  In addition, it's a great way to slow down a pass rush if you know your OL is prone to giving up pressure.

Edited by BudsOilers
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Titans279 said:

 

Tannehill's rating was 89 and Brady's was 88. Kind of retarded to act like their scores are that different.

You know what else is kind of retarded? Attempting to correct a statement that was an obvious troll sentence. It’s even more retarded if you thought that was serious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

 

The first graphic looks at grade levels of a QB and then directly correlates it to W/L in the regular season and in the playoffs for the 4 seasons they scored.   There would be some teams that have a winning record but don't make the playoffs and we've seen .500 or worse teams win a bad division too.  Also because the seasons # equates to instances, you have to weight them accordingly.

 

The second graphic looks at the QB scores aggregate and correlates it to win %, team making the playoffs, winning record, year to year stability for the 4 seasons they used.

 

Fuck. I'm gonna go take a nap or something. Do not understand how the playoffs % column in 1 isn't the basis of the playoffs correlation in 2. 

 

confused big brother GIF by Big Brother After Dark

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, oldschool said:

 

Stop embarrassing yourself. show me all the sprint right options that cut the field in half. Show me all the crossers to wide open WRs, show me the TE pass up the seam. You are so bad at this its not even funny.

 

you think we dont have crossers?  Literally AJs main route?

You think we dont have TE seams? Are you fucking kidding me? did you even watch the game this week? let me do 17 seconds of research

 

 

You think just because we dont run as many plays we ran with Mariota that we arent largely using the same playbook based on the same principals?

quit making up bullshit that has nothing to do with the conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, FinFaninNOVA said:

And pressure, and air yards of the throw, and distance to the sideline..... you know, all the things that make completing a pass more difficult.....

 

image.png.508b5ae99b77a5355ba059205bed2245.png

 

which has ZERO to do with the defined reads and QB friendly offensive scheme.

 

What dont you get?

pressure - offensive line injury

air yards of the throw - deeper passing offense  - exactly like it said.. and still nothing to do with clearly defined presnap reads making it easier on the QB.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...