Grant Cohn on Smith's Strengths and Weaknesses

[Crimsoncrew]

If he believed it was a good point he would be a retard. He is just pretending a 5 pass sample means something cause it is an easy way to screw with a debate I was dominating with facts and reasoned opinions.

Which is exactly what you did with the "Smith had an average rating in '09 and '10 if you compare him with ALL passers." Do you think you are a retard?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

506 INTs in the NFL in 2011


If you make 50 of them go from INT to nothing more than an incomplete pass.

NFL QB Rating goes from 82.5 to........................................ 83.7

It was asked before, but I don't recall you answering it: where are you getting this "average NFL QB rating"?

 

[clyde_carbon]

i'll take a game like the saints over any game during sing's time...

smith had a much better season this year than he did last year, even if u take out the dismal performances before the eagles games near benching.

Smith averaged less TDs and yards per game than he did in 2010. He also had a worse redzone QB rating. Aside from limiting INTs, where's the improvement?

 

[Flyingiguana]

Smith averaged less TDs and yards per game than he did in 2010. He also had a worse redzone QB rating. Aside from limiting INTs, where's the improvement?

he ran the offense how harbaugh wanted it, and when we needed a score, he made the plays. did u not watch the games?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Smith averaged less TDs and yards per game than he did in 2010. He also had a worse redzone QB rating. Aside from limiting INTs, where's the improvement?

I can't agree with an implication that Smith didn't improve this year. He was far more comfortable in the offense, actually improvised on occasion, seemed to throw a better ball by and large, and fixed perhaps his biggest problem from prior seasons by drastically reducing the turnovers, which were a huge problem (arguably the biggest single factor in our 0-5 start) in the first half of the 2010 season. He also showed more leadership and ability to make plays in crunch time than he had in his first six seasons combined. With the defense and STs performing the way they did, we didn't need as many yards and TDs. We needed Smith to protect the football and capitalize on great field position.

I don't think there's any doubt that Smith showed nice improvement, but he still has a long way to go to really stake a firm claim to the job. Smith had a good season, but now that we are legit super bowl contenders, we need more than that.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

They catch like All World guys.

Btw, not sure when these numbers are from, but the Pats ended the season with 22 drops, so they dropped five additional passes seemingly fairly late in the year. The Niners dropped four after this chart was created, though presumably in fewer opportunities.

Not really sure where the "attempts" figure is coming from, so I can't update these.

 

[Flyingiguana]

i;d like to see drop % when targeting a wr. new orleans for example throws a ton of short screens which would drop the %

 

[imac_21]

If he believed it was a good point he would be a retard. He is just pretending a 5 pass sample means something cause it is an easy way to screw with a debate I was dominating with facts and reasoned opinions.

You included plenty of 5 pass samples in your BS about Smith vs the average QB rating this year. Why should Kaepernick's passes count toward that stat?

 

[imac_21]

Nothing is perfect, everything just plays a part in the overall analysis. Drops should not excuse Smith but it is a factor and you know we don't have the most assured hands in the league just like we don't have the most accurate QB. I think if we could factor in everything, Smith would be a little better but the overall rankings would stay about the same. The 90.7 would be a 93 or so, but he'd still be 9th or so. There's a chance he'd go to 8th or 7th with a certain analysis. Rodgers would also be better with no drops. Alex might make up some ground statistically to some QBs but I don't think it's big enough to make a big difference in the top ten QBs. I also don't think, unless it happened at the end of a game, that it would change public perception outside of stats.

I don't think standard effort meant anything so difficult that one QB would benefit over another. I'd guess that it would be analyzed pretty much equally. I understand that drops has limited value and are vague at times, but I don't feel that it'll lend to an extreme argument either way. (Extreme being that standard effort means a jumping tip of the fingers drop nor that it would have to be on the numbers with no defenders to be considered a drop)

I didn't mean to imply standard effort benefited one QB over another. Just that the definition of "standard effort" is ambiguous. If multiple sites calculate drops based on "standard effort" by the receiver, do they all define standard effort the same way?

 

[imac_21]

That is all NFL passes. If you took the INTs to 456 the rating goes up 1.2

It crystallizes my point that data matters. And lots of data needs more fight to crack it than the crumbs they have thrown against it.

The people whining about counting 3 passes from a WR or RB that threw an INT is some factor in the yearly average for QB rating in the NFL when Smith was dead on in 09 and 10 look ridiculous.

Bullshit. If you compare Smith to NFL starting QBs that year, based on QB rating, he ranked in the bottom half. Somehow you have decided that being in the bottom half (bottom 3rd even) is an average performance for a starting QB.

Now you're trying to spin it as if the QBs that didn't throw a lot of passes didn't affect the ratings because changing their INTs to INCs doesn't effect it much. But what about trick plays that resulted in TDs?

Instead of including all players who threw a pass, common sense would dictate you would take all players that qualified based on the NFL's numbers (14 attempts per game averaged).

Why do you refuse to compare Smith strictly against his peers (other starting NFL QBs)? Why do you feel the need to include David Carr and Troy Smith and Jimmy Clausen in the calculations?

 

[MHSL82]

I didn't mean to imply standard effort benefited one QB over another. Just that the definition of "standard effort" is ambiguous. If multiple sites calculate drops based on "standard effort" by the receiver, do they all define standard effort the same way?

I agree that it makes a difference, but I don't think it's as big as it could be. I don't see any institution that spends money on analysis creating a definition that is so tight or so loose that it renders the information so useless that I'd worry about it. Some, of course, are better than others, but don't all of them come out with relatively the same ranking for dropped balls, give or take a few?

I do evaluate drops because I like to see what could have been, just for my personal knowledge, and I'll take their word for it. I look at it as potential if the players get better. I don't use it like Vipor to state that it fundamentally changes what we think about certain QBs. I do think, as long as most sources produce similar rankings (not identical), that it shows something about where our receivers are and what they could improve. Again, it gives me hope that with better hands we will get better results, but I also think better throws will gain more than assured hands. I don't have any proof that we will get better hands or better throws, but if none of Alex's passes were dropped and we still got the 61% completion percentage, 7.1 ypa, 3144 yards, 17-5, then I'd be less encouraged that we could get much improvement from both QB and WRs. It would all be in Alex's hands, and while I'm more confident than most, I'd like it if all our positions had things that they could add to last year's team (other than just more separation, I suppose). If the numbers are static (as in we can't change the past), then the more drops we saw last year, the higher swing improved receivers could get if Alex does not improve. If Alex improves then we could get both QB and WR push.

 

[iHATEdodgers]

This thread is a trainwreck.

 

[MHSL82]

This thread is a trainwreck.

No, it's not! ... Damn, you're right. :mmph:

 

[Flyingiguana]

planes, trains and automobiles....but no interceptions