QBR Funhouse!

[Z-Comeback]

There was some discussion this past week about the subjectivity of QBR so I thought I'd throw out this weeks QBR leaders thus far:

NFL - Week 4 Total QBR Leaders - ESPN

Alex Smith 21-33 291 yds 2 TD's ==== 28.7 QBR which is good for 24th place this week.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think his performance was the best of the week, but 24th? Rex Grossman, Matt Moore, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub and Matt Hasselbeck (#1) all had better QBR this week.

What do you all think?

 

[SeattleNinersFan]

Wow, while A.S. was not great he was way better than that! In the 2nd half when his team needed him he came through compaired to Romo who almost singlehandedly lost the game for his team yet Romo had an above average 55 QBR?! I actually thank the a 55 QBR for Romo really highlights a fault in this metric.

 

[ViperVisor]

QBR is fudged up with clutch factors doing who knows what beyond what it should be weighting on 3rd downs or truly garbage stats and the sack factor killing QBs with O-Line failures.

Like yesterday Babin unblocked on a 4 man rush causing the fumble.

 

[Bracus]

Once again proving ESPN needs to stick to providing one-liners during highlights. While he wasn't the best, he was easy top 10 borderline top 5 yesterday. Nobody really did anything special except Vick (loss), Brady (bad opponent), Brees (bad opponent) which this new system is supposed to take into account. Keep in mind, I am far from an Alex believer. Just wanna give credit where it's due.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Gotta say, I'm surprised Smith is so low. As said, it wasn't a great game for him, but he came through when he needed to. It's possible he was hurt in this one due to YAC from his receivers. But he also threw some longer balls this week, should have had pretty good clutch points. I'd imagine the fumble during the first half two-minute drill hurts that, though. And he was pretty quiet in the 4th quarter. Still strange.

 

[Flyingiguana]

i'll take the win over qbr anyday

 

[Z-Comeback]

i'll take the win over qbr anyday

How many points is a win worth in QBR, anyway? LOL

 

[southbaysportsfan]

How many points is a win worth in QBR, anyway? LOL

That's a really good question. I would throw out something like 25 points. Its all about wins and losses. Very rarely does a team win despite the play of their quarterback. Generally, the qb played well or at least managed the game properly. The most important stat in footbal is Wins and Losses

 

[threelittleturds]

That's a really good question. I would throw out something like 25 points. Its all about wins and losses. Very rarely does a team win despite the play of their quarterback. Generally, the qb played well or at least managed the game properly. The most important stat in footbal is Wins and Losses

The Bears and Ravens are the two teams that come to mind who can win and score a lot of points even with minimal help from their QBs. Of course they don't do it every game, so as you said, very rarely does it happen. With Chicago though, I think there was a game a few years ago when Hester scored more points on returns than the offense did.. against the Cardinals I think?

 

[threelittleturds]

The QBR is strange, it's been said in another thread that it is hard to trust it's value when they hide the formula from us. I am curious as to what Smith did that was so negative in this game. He took 3 sacks and had one fumble I believe, but throwing 2 TDs and being there for a 3rd TD drive while behind should count as clutch performances right? Wasn't that supposed to be weighed higher than throwing TD passes in the 4th quarter when your team is up by 21 points?

If YAC is an issue, why is Hasslebeck so high? I saw the highlights of that game, on his TD passes one guy took it an extra 50 yards with pathetic tackling being brushed off, and on another, the defense screwed up and left a guy open and he had a lot of YAC too.

It's weird that Smith's best performance of the year while behind, is his worst QBR. There is something very weird about that.

 

[MW49ers5]

This "New and Improved" QBR seems to be one hot mess and just another in a long line of failed attempts to improve on what we already have. As imperfect as our current rating system is, it is far more reliable because it uses only tangible criteria; which, over time is equally flawed for all QB's.

With this new QBR, from all I have read, it is mostly, if not entirely subjective criteria inserted into seemingly pedestrian methods of calculating this QBR.

E.g., QB's are only 50% responsible for sacks, Whaaaaa? While this 50/50 may represent some low-level calculated mean among all QB, there are QB's who are clearly more or less than 50% responsible for sacks. (See Jay Cutler, Aaron Rodgers & Peyton Manning)

Over the course of a season, depending on the weight of sacks in the QBR, that difference in the measure of responsibility would skew the numbers and this is just one of many subjective calculations that make up this QBR as I understand it.

Just as soon as ESPN releases the details for this QBR it will be placed under a microscope by Graduate mathematicians at Universities across the country; which, IMO is one, if not the very reason they have not released those details.

Speaking only for myself, I would be embarrassed to use this rating in a serious discussion. At this point, until more is known about this formula, it can't be taken seriously.

 

[Z-Comeback]

Speaking only for myself, I would be embarrassed to use this rating in a serious discussion. At this point, until more is known about this formula, it can't be taken seriously.

You can speak for me too. +1

 

[Giantsmojo]

I think one of the problem is that Alex Smith got most of his passing stats when down by 20 which is a negative for QBR it doesn't matter that they came back and that what Smith did when down by 20 mattered they may view it as garbage time stats.

 

[Flyingiguana]

qb rating > qbr. qb rating may not be perfect but it shows how efficient a qb is. adding an element to qb rating to factor in 3rd down conversions might give the best overal measure of how successful a qb is

 

[MW49ers5]

qb rating > qbr. qb rating may not be perfect but it shows how efficient a qb is. adding an element to qb rating to factor in 3rd down conversions might give the best overal measure of how successful a qb is

You raise a good point FI! There are plenty more objective, tangible measurements that can be added to the current equation to tighten it up and make it more reliable and meaningful.

 

[I_am_1z]

I'm pro-QBR,

98 of Alexander Smith's 291 passing yards were yards after the catch (YAC). We're still down near the bottom of the league in terms of total throughout the regular season, but when you compare the NE Patriots who average 120.2 YAC per game this season, 98 is pretty good.
&
Watching the QBR special on espn, I remember them saying they don't really put any weight on YAC. For the obvious reasons, a screen play shouldn't be weighted as much as a 50 yard pass in the air, even if they both go for 50 yard TDs.

 

[Z-Comeback]

I'm pro-QBR,

98 of Alexander Smith's 291 passing yards were yards after the catch (YAC). We're still down near the bottom of the league in terms of total throughout the regular season, but when you compare the NE Patriots who average 120.2 YAC per game this season, 98 is pretty good.
&
Watching the QBR special on espn, I remember them saying they don't really put any weight on YAC. For the obvious reasons, a screen play shouldn't be weighted as much as a 50 yard pass in the air, even if they both go for 50 yard TDs.

For me, that is the problem because it isn't true. Can anyone honestly argue that Smith had zero to do with the pass to Hunter that netted 40 yards? Many times YAC isn't even possible unless the QB puts the ball in the right place.
I can only imagine what some of Montana's QBR's would've been like!

 

[MW49ers5]

I'm pro-QBR,

98 of Alexander Smith's 291 passing yards were yards after the catch (YAC). We're still down near the bottom of the league in terms of total throughout the regular season, but when you compare the NE Patriots who average 120.2 YAC per game this season, 98 is pretty good.
&
Watching the QBR special on espn, I remember them saying they don't really put any weight on YAC. For the obvious reasons, a screen play shouldn't be weighted as much as a 50 yard pass in the air, even if they both go for 50 yard TDs.

Preface:

1z, this is not at all an indictment on your opinion, I have absolute respect for your opinions, my comment is directed toward 'them'.

That said, I have a huge issue with the bold. When a QB hits his receiver in stride at full speed those Y'sAC belong WAYYY MORE to the QB than they do the receiver. Those Y'sAC were made possible BECAUSE of the QB not despite him. How can they call this a QBR when one of the most difficult things to do as a QB is not even considered in the rating??

I understand the premise behind the screen pass argument, (though I am not sure I agree with it either) but to not measure all Y'sAC based on the same argument makes this QBR even more of a joke than it was 15 minutes ago.

Man, considering Y'sAC as an insignificant or an irrelevant measure of quarterbacking, whaaaa? Bill Walsh is laughing in his grave.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

QBR is BS. I'll stick with QB rating.

 

[southbaysportsfan]

Preface:

1z, this is not at all an indictment on your opinion, I have absolute respect for your opinions, my comment is directed toward 'them'.

That said, I have a huge issue with the bold. When a QB hits his receiver in stride at full speed those Y'sAC belong WAYYY MORE to the QB than they do the receiver. Those Y'sAC were made possible BECAUSE of the QB not despite him. How can they call this a QBR when one of the most difficult things to do as a QB is not even considered in the rating??

I understand the premise behind the screen pass argument, (though I am not sure I agree with it either) but to not measure all Y'sAC based on the same argument makes this QBR even more of a joke than it was 15 minutes ago.

Man, considering Y'sAC as an insignificant or an irrelevant measure of quarterbacking, whaaaa? Bill Walsh is laughing in his grave.

+1