RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

[ddaryl]

I am enjoying this guys material. Thought I'd share his offerings and figure with the diehards here it would drive interesting discussions ....possibly

here is a desription on how he calculates all this stuff out.

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Content/QB_College-QB-Vers1.0_2-17-2011.htm

A page with all his latest articles for QB's

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Player_Tabs/news_qb.htm

Gabbert

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Content/NFL-Draft_2011_Gabbert_2-17-2011.htm

Mallett

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Content/NFL-Draft_2011_Mallett_2-22-2011.htm

Stanzi

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Content/NFL-Draft_2011_Stanzi_2-23-2011.htm

Locker

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/Content/NFL-Draft_2011_Locker_2-23-2011.htm

Newton

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/2011/NFL%20Draft/NFL%20Draft_2011_Newton_2-24-2011.htm

Ponder

http://www.fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Player_News/2011/NFL%20Draft/NFL%20Draft_2011_Ponder_2-23-2011.htm

[DraftBoy]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

Never been a fan of Metrics.

[ddaryl]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

Never been a fan of Metrics.

I am.. I think they tell a tale that shouldn't be ignored

Nor should they be used as Gospel.... but there are characteristics that seperate those who might be successful and who might not...


Stock Brokers use metrics, Businessmen use metrics... metrics are used with great success is almost all facets of life.

Really surprised that you would ignore metrics... they would make you a better more rounded analysts IMO

[DraftBoy]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I am.. I think they tell a tale that shouldn't be ignored

Nor should they be used as Gospel.... but there are characteristics that seperate those who might be successful and who might not...


Stock Brokers use metrics, Businessmen use metrics... metrics are used with great success is almost all facets of life.

Really surprised that you would ignore metrics... they would make you a better more rounded analysts IMO

I disagree, give me a stat and I can make it say anything I want. Anybody worth their salt as a talent evaluator knows that numbers dont tell 1/10th the story on how somebody will be at the next level.

Metrics are fun to look at it and consider but in the end I dont factor them into my evaluations.

[ddaryl]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I disagree, give me a stat and I can make it say anything I want. Anybody worth their salt as a talent evaluator knows that numbers dont tell 1/10th the story on how somebody will be at the next level.

Metrics are fun to look at it and consider but in the end I dont factor them into my evaluations.

Well I disagree too... yes statisitics can be manipulated which is why you couple it with your style of eyes on analysis of watching and breaking down tape. Anyone worth their salt IMO would not ignore metrics nor would they depend soley on them. The balances of both styles makes for a full rounded grade

but why do many of the top successful QB's in the NFL share similar metrics ?

metrics are not full proof, and there is always acceptions. Always will be, but that goes just the same from your style of analysis as well. Some QB's looked solid on tape but failed n the NFL, some had question marks on tape but had success

again metrics are used very successfully in science and business...

but enough about that... we're all different

[DraftBoy]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

Well I disagree too... yes statisitics can be manipulated which is why you couple it with your style of eyes on analysis of watching and breaking down tape. Anyone worth their salt IMO would not ignore metrics nor would they depend soley on them. The balances of both styles makes for a full rounded grade

but why do many of the top successful QB's in the NFL share similar metrics ?
metrics are not full proof, and there is always acceptions. Always will be, but that goes just the same from your style of analysis as well. Some QB's looked solid on tape but failed n the NFL, some had question marks on tape but had success

again metrics are used very successfully in science and business...

but enough about that... we're all different

You may want to dig a little into the history of metrics before asking that question. There have been plenty of accusations of "fixing" metrics to fit things or players in to try and make them more commonly acceptable.

That's why I factor in metrics as much as any other statistic, which in the end is very little.

[Thief]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I agree with ddaryl. How can metrics be nearly ignored? WTF.

[ddaryl]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

You may want to dig a little into the history of metrics before asking that question. There have been plenty of accusations of "fixing" metrics to fit things or players in to try and make them more commonly acceptable.

That's why I factor in metrics as much as any other statistic, which in the end is very little.

his articles explain how he uses them and compares them. I don't think he himself is doing any fitting..

I think your confusing manipulated metrics with the using of legitimate stats to form a metric that is used uniformly.

metrics definitley have merit

[DraftBoy]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

his articles explain how he uses them and compares them. I don't think he himself is doing any fitting..

I think your confusing manipulated metrics with the using of legitimate stats to form a metric that is used uniformly.

metrics definitley have merit

I dont disagree, but in terms of talent evaluation I dont see a real use. Maybe one day in the future (especially with more arm chair GM's than ever before) but I will always take watching tape and what I see with my eyes on the field, then what a data set can tell me. Im old school that way.

If Metrics agree with me, that's terrific but Im not going to sweat it or factor it in.

[Philagape]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

As with any number, there's so much they don't tell you. They can tell you what happened, but not why it happened, especially in such a complex sport with so many variables. It cannot possibly be reduced to numbers.

[ddaryl]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

As with any number, there's so much they don't tell you. They can tell you what happened, but not why it happened, especially in such a complex sport with so many variables. It cannot possibly be reduced to numbers.

but combined with tape analysis interviews etc they do help form a clearer picture.

[Nighthawk]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I view them more as a crutch, the excuse for why a person picks a player...more then I view them as a help. Somebody who isn't good with how they feel about a player can use metrics and say "hey, the metrics said this was the guy to take". There have been plenty of good players who's metrics sucked ass, but turned out to be good players. It's a tool, but a small one.

[ddaryl]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I view them more as a crutch, the excuse for why a person picks a player...more then I view them as a help. Somebody who isn't good with how they feel about a player can use metrics and say "hey, the metrics said this was the guy to take". There have been plenty of good players who's metrics sucked ass, but turned out to be good players. It's a tool, but a small one.

there are plenty of QB's who looked good on tape and put up huge numbers that sucked ass in the NFL too...

Combining both styles forms a complete picture, where ones expertise can use their deductions to form the final opinion

it is very obvious from the listing below that metrics alone do not paint the picture. But it could of definitley gotten people thinking that Ryan Leaf shouldn't of been drafted early, and it also showed that Tom Brady was very worthy of consideration.

time will tell, but the whole its a crutch thing I find to be ludicrous... It has merit if used properly. If I was a scout I know I would be relying on more then just my eyes to make determinations.

The Ratings:
Note:
·“Adj” = adjusted results weighted for strength of opponent, and results against weak opponents thrown out.
·"Equalized" Per game -- the QBs college stats in "key" games/tougher opponents based on an equal amount of passes per game for each QB (35 per game).
·We're not putting all the data points on here, or the list would be a mile wide. Just clipped what I thought would be interesting on some of the per attempt, per completion tallies.
*In yellow are the elite/pioneer QBs that I started to build the foundation of this system upon to see if a system could be built.

	P Score	QB	Yr	College	Comp Pct	Yds per Comp	Pass per TD	Pass Per INT	Equalized Yds Per game	Equalized TDs per game	Equalized INT per game
1	1.156	Bradford, Sam	2008	Oklahoma	65.5%	13.8	10.8	51.0	315.5	3.4	1.0
2	1.120	Roethlisberger, Ben	2003	Miami, Ohio	68.6%	13.7	17.1	58.0	333.0	2.0	0.7
3	1.109	Brady, Tom	1999	Michigan	63.8%	12.0	15.0	40.0	266.3	2.3	0.9
4	1.077	Manning, Peyton	1997	Tennessee	62.4%	11.7	15.6	44.4	252.3	2.3	0.9
5	1.022	Pennington, Chad	1999	Marshall	64.7%	13.6	17.0	37.4	282.1	1.9	1.0
6	1.015	Palmer, Carson	2002	USC	62.8%	12.6	15.8	45.7	265.2	1.9	0.6
7	1.007	Sanchez, Mark	2008	USC	66.0%	11.5	11.8	37.6	256.7	3.1	0.9
8	0.994	Rodgers, Aaron	2004	California	63.8%	11.0	18.6	37.3	253.1	1.5	0.6
9	0.993	Rivers, Philip	2003	NC State	67.4%	12.3	15.7	74.5	286.1	2.5	0.6
10	0.973	Leftwich, Byron	2002	Marshall	65.9%	12.1	17.6	44.0	276.7	2.1	0.8
11	0.947	Smith, Alex	2004	Utah	67.8%	13.2	11.3	90.0	307.1	3.0	0.4
12	0.917	Kolb, Kevin	2006	Houston	66.2%	13.8	15.1	272.0	310.5	2.3	0.1
13	0.904	Brees, Drew	2000	Purdue	60.8%	11.8	16.4	37.6	253.2	2.1	1.0
14	0.879	Pike, Tony	2009	Cincinnati	61.4%	11.7	13.9	44.6	218.0	2.4	0.9
15	0.873	Schaub, Matt	2003	Virginia	68.8%	9.9	23.6	47.1	238.3	1.5	0.7
16	0.859	Flacco, Joe	2007	Delaware	60.2%	12.5	22.4	179.5	264.2	1.6	0.2

**Less than 0.850, higher “bust” or never make it potential…

	P Score	QB	Yr	College	Comp Pct	Yds per Comp	Pass per TD	Pass Per INT	Equalized Yds Per game	Equalized TDs per game	Equalized INT per game
17	0.822	Beck, John	2006	BYU	66.4%	12.6	16.3	61.0	287.3	2.2	0.5
18	0.811	Stafford, Matt	2008	Georgia	60.6%	14.3	14.4	34.3	283.9	1.9	1.4
19	0.782	Leaf, Ryan	1997	Wash State	52.8%	17.8	16.6	37.9	333.7	1.9	0.9
20	0.752	Ryan, Matt	2007	Boston College	58.8%	12.2	21.1	34.5	236.5	1.6	1.1
21	0.721	Couch, Tim	1998	Kentucky	66.6%	10.1	23.7	36.9	224.6	1.4	0.9
22	0.696	Carr, David	2001	Fresno State	62.7%	12.7	14.7	93.0	246.9	2.0	0.4
23	0.685	Manning, Eli	2003	Ole Miss	57.3%	12.2	19.6	31.9	239.9	1.7	1.1
24	0.649	Harrington, Joey	2001	Oregon	55.5%	11.5	20.0	50.0	222.8	1.7	0.7
25	0.645	Russell, JaMarcus	2006	LSU	62.9%	14.2	18.9	34.0	270.9	1.2	1.2
26	0.631	Campbell, Jason	2004	Auburn	72.1%	13.2	16.3	29.4	335.6	2.2	1.2
27	0.616	Brohm, Brian	2007	Louisville	63.2%	12.2	21.2	35.3	269.7	1.7	1.0
28	0.610	Leinart, Matt	2005	USC	60.8%	12.4	31.9	51.0	274.1	0.9	0.7
29	0.607	Freeman, Josh	2008	Kansas State	55.0%	12.7	21.8	30.0	260.0	1.6	1.4
30	0.596	McNabb, Donovan	1998	Syracuse	59.4%	12.7	14.1	49.3	290.7	2.7	0.5
31	0.592	Whitehurst, Charlie	2005	Clemson	65.2%	10.1	32.9	32.9	226.6	1.1	1.0
32	0.579	Quinn, Brady	2007	Notre Dame	58.8%	11.5	17.3	62.2	214.3	2.1	0.9
33	0.532	Booty, John David	2007	USC	62.1%	10.5	15.0	97.5	236.6	2.5	0.3
34	0.532	Young, Vince	2005	Texas	69.0%	14.0	11.8	35.5	310.6	2.3	0.9
35	0.489	Romo, Tony	2003	Eastern Illinois	62.3%	10.6	15.7	20.0	228.6	2.3	1.8
36	0.465	Olson, Drew	2005	UCLA	59.1%	14.7	11.0	51.3	256.1	2.5	0.4
37	0.461	Cutler, Jay	2005	Vanderbilt	57.1%	11.5	21.2	31.8	203.0	1.3	1.3
38	0.456	White, Jason	2004	Oklahoma	62.3%	11.7	10.9	25.9	233.4	2.4	2.0
39	0.454	Ainge, Erik	2007	Tennessee	60.8%	11.1	22.2	63.0	235.2	1.6	0.7
40	0.446	Walter, Andrew	2004	Arizona State	55.4%	11.8	19.3	57.8	237.6	1.7	1.0
41	0.382	Smith, Rusty	2009	Florida Atlantic	57.8%	12.8	18.5	37.0	243.0	1.5	1.3
42	0.377	Harrell, Graham	2008	Texas Tech	63.2%	12.6	14.3	65.8	282.4	2.2	0.4
43	0.357	Kafka, Mike	2009	Northwestern	63.0%	8.8	25.7	30.8	200.0	1.3	1.0
44	0.308	O'Connell, Kevin	2007	SD State	59.7%	10.6	52.5	52.5	222.3	0.6	0.8
45	0.271	Tebow, Tim	2009	Florida	67.8%	13.1	17.7	46.0	301.2	1.7	0.9
46	0.270	LeFevour, Dan	2009	Central Mich	65.3%	9.4	24.4	53.6	211.7	1.3	0.7
47	0.256	Greene, David	2004	Georgia	53.9%	13.0	15.7	51.0	245.8	2.1	0.9
48	0.237	Henne, Chad	2007	Michigan	58.6%	12.0	15.0	42.0	210.2	1.7	0.7
49	0.228	Smith, Troy	2006	Ohio State	63.9%	12.2	13.2	39.5	253.9	2.3	1.0
50	0.196	Brennan, Colt	2007	Hawaii	65.4%	12.0	18.6	20.5	321.3	1.9	2.5
51	0.192	Croyle, Brody	2005	Alabama	57.3%	13.2	21.4	171.0	233.9	1.4	0.2
52	0.145	Hall, Max	2009	BYU	65.5%	12.2	11.9	28.3	261.8	2.4	1.5
53	0.117	Skelton, John	2009	Fordham	61.0%	10.8	47.0	141.0	231.6	0.7	0.2
54	0.049	Orton, Kyle	2004	Purdue	52.8%	13.5	15.4	72.0	242.2	2.0	0.6
55	-0.074	McCoy, Colt	2009	Texas	66.5%	8.9	26.8	23.0	188.6	1.0	1.7
56	-0.310	Grossman, Rex	2002	Florida	56.1%	11.6	25.2	25.2	226.4	1.2	1.3
57	-0.364	Garrard, David	2001	East Carolina	54.7%	12.7	25.1	25.1	243.5	1.4	1.4
58	-0.436	Snead, Jevan	2009	Ole Miss	51.3%	13.1	46.8	15.6	209.2	0.5	2.9
59	-0.561	Anderson, Derek	2005	Oregon State	51.2%	12.9	20.1	29.3	223.0	1.7	1.3
60	-0.667	Robinson, Zac	2009	Oklahoma State	54.5%	9.8	30.4	21.3	176.4	1.1	2.4

[Bling]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

Never been a fan of Metrics.

I am. They're not guarantees, but they tell more to a story and can isolate bias.

[DraftBoy]

Re: RC Fisher's statistical anlysis articles on QB's in the draft

I am. They're not guarantees, but they tell more to a story and can isolate bias.

Also easily create bias.