Locker And Drop Rates

[Jamalisms]

Also... just to beat the point entirely into submission...

Brees' over/under/wide is 5.5% less than Locker's, Manning's is 4.7% less, Rodgers' 3.2%, Hass' 2.2% and Brady's is 1.2% worse.

All are 10%+ better against the blitz... Manning is 16.5% better and Brees only 10.2%. These ranges aren't really that similar and over/under/wide is far from the only thing that is causing incompletions against the blitz. Trying to compare 10% to 3% is just an oversimplification all around and (to me at least) is wandering off the path of statistical utility.

[Pragidealist]

@Pragidealist

10% is on roughly 1/3 of the snaps. Mathematically it holds out pretty well that it could be entirely related to inaccuracy on blitzes only. Assume accuracy on the other 2/3 is the same as another QB... 10% spread across one third comes down to about 3%.

I'd wager it's more convoluted than that, but as it relates to your question... the 3% is pretty well in line with the 10%.

First explain how 10% became 33%

I'm sure your re right but I'm missing something

[Jamalisms]

10% is on blitzes, which is only one third of all snaps. 3% is on all snaps.

You could look at those two numbers and say the the 3% is entirely because of issues against the blitz (assume that the other 2/3 of all pass attempts produced no excess over/under/wide issues).

0% excess * 2/3 + 10% excess * 1/3 = 3% (ish)

That doesn't make it true (you'd have to watch games and chart things out between over/under/wide on blitzes and non-blitzes), but it works mathematically if you use 10% and 3%. Then there's the issue of those two numbers not really being precise and that incompletions against the blitz don't have to be over/under/wide issues so it's probably an apples/oranges comparison at the outset, which is why I think the utility of the comparison is low.

[cenj]

I agree with this.  Whether Locker can get these nuances dialed in remains to be seen.  I think if anyone can it's him considering his work ethic and character (or at least as I understand them from a distance).  Though, I totally understand the skepticism as well.

 

I'm still optimistic on Locker and am hopeful the issues are all correctable, and that worst case scenario he is at least accurate enough to be a good QB once combined with his other traits and athleticism and a better schematic fit.

[Pragidealist]

Also... just to beat the point entirely into submission...

Brees' over/under/wide is 5.5% less than Locker's, Manning's is 4.7% less, Rodgers' 3.2%, Hass' 2.2% and Brady's is 1.2% worse.

All are 10%+ better against the blitz... Manning is 16.5% better and Brees only 10.2%. These ranges aren't really that similar and over/under/wide is far from the only thing that is causing incompletions against the blitz. Trying to compare 10% to 3% is just an oversimplification all around and (to me at least) is wandering off the path of statistical utility.

Futility? Possibly - but interesting to me

[Pragidealist]

10% is on blitzes, which is only one third of all snaps. 3% is on all snaps.

Ahhh ... Yes but Why does that matter? Mathematically ?

I would have to break that out of % to see the impact ... Later

Thx

[Pragidealist]

10% is on blitzes, which is only one third of all snaps. 3% is on all snaps.

You could look at those two numbers and say the the 3% is entirely because of issues against the blitz (assume that the other 2/3 of all pass attempts produced no excess over/under/wide issues).

That doesn't make it true, but it works mathematically if you use those two numbers. Then there's the issue of those two numbers not really being precise and that incompletions against the blitz don't have to be over/under/wide issues so it's probably an apples/oranges comparison at the outset.

More like poodles to dogs comparison .. *shrugs*

Good discussion

[Jamalisms]

 

poodles to dogs

Apples to road apples?

[Pragidealist]

The crazy thing is - this is not necessarily a pro locker argument. He's not just "naturally inaccurate" - at least by these stats

The bigger problem was making decisions quickly both not holding onto the ball and handling blitzes better.

It's pinpointing the problem.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Pragidealist

[Jamalisms]

But if you have to incorporate that many assumptions and generalities to pinpoint something... is it really pinpointed? That's the issue I'm having with your conclusion.

[cenj]

Every starting NFL QB is accurate when they have zero pressure, a wide-open WR, and understand their progression and the defensive coverage.

 

There is a reason why every single QB pro-day throwing, even scrubs hit 90%+ of their targets. All these guys are generally accurate -- just like all these guys are athletes, everyone is fast and strong. The comparison is between each other, the elite level.

 

This is simply not true.  Tebow is not accurate - at all.  

 

Seriously Prag? You're gonna use Tebow to counter my "starting QB/generally accurate" comment, when Tebow has been the poster child for a QB who can't throw?

 

 

Those are not purely mechanical/accuracy issues.   They are issues with progessions, comfort in the pocket, etc.  Calling those things accuracy issues is a mislabel.  Thats the point.

 

I didn't call those things accuracy issues. I said those things are part of the game and affect every QB in the NFL and their accuracy.  Accuracy is the ability to hit a target. Locker missed the target a lot last year.

 

Accuracy on the run is still accuracy. Accuracy under pressure is still accuracy. There' deep ball accuracy, short accuracy, accuracy on the fastball, accuracy on soft touch passes, accuracy on passes to the flats -- lots of different types of throws and situations QBs need to be able to do consistently to be considered accurate.

[Pragidealist]

But if you have to incorporate that many assumptions and generalities to pinpoint something... is it really pinpointed? That's the issue I'm having with your conclusion.

Fair - I suppose

I wouldn't say assumptions. I'm trying to align facts - it leads to a possible conclusion

None others have been suggested but Superhorns and its logical

But it is only one possible-

[Pragidealist]

Seriously Prag? You're gonna use Tebow to counter my "starting QB/generally accurate" comment, when Tebow has been the poster child for a QB who can't throw?

I didn't call those things accuracy issues. I said those things are part of the game and affect every QB in the NFL and their accuracy. Accuracy is the ability to hit a target. Locker missed the target a lot last year.

Accuracy on the run is still accuracy. Accuracy under pressure is still accuracy. There' deep ball accuracy, short accuracy, accuracy on the fastball, accuracy on soft touch passes, accuracy on passes to the flats -- lots of different types of throws and situations QBs need to be able to do consistently to be considered accurate.

So under your definition of acurracy - if the wr runs a lot of wrong am routes = Qb missing the target then he's an inaccurate passer?

As an example

Edited May 22, 2013 by Pragidealist

[Pragidealist]

My point being cenj that hitting the target is team execution and contains many factors - one of which is accuracy

[Cyrus]

I just went through the Chargers game and on most incompletions there was pass pressure (unblocked defender in a gap) in less than 1.5 seconds on average. This doesn't include drops or tipped passes. Now that's just one game that I picked out at random and I have nothing to compare it to but it was interesting nonetheless.

 

I'd like to go through and chart some more games, but obviously pass protection was a big issue. Velasco in particular struggled with stunts/twists and seemed out of place during  late or added pressure.