Dak, Time to Release, and Air Yards

[percyhoward]

Well completed air yards adds in WR variance. Which, to some extent is there anyways.

It is, and there are a lot of other factors that go into the time to release, but this is a creative way to try to quantify a QB's vision of the field that has some substance to it.

 

[Future]

i mean, correlation doesn't equal causation. but i'm not sure what else would have changed that would magically make dak's numbers significantly better after acquiring a legitimate WR. i'd have to assume at least some of it is due to cooper.

The only thing that would make Dak faster to his checkdown is if it's now only a half-field read. Amari getting open quickly would help, but not by .3 seconds, I don't think.

 

[erod]

We all see that Dak sees the field slowly, holds the ball too long, lacks coincidence in his accuracy, and checks the ball down a ton.

 

[JustChip]

this stat is also a team stat. QBs with receivers who get open more easily will have better numbers, as we see with the split before and after cooper.

Good point. But that's really my point. It is less important what the stat says for an individual, than how that individual fits and performs within the team. If you simply based a personnel decision on these stats, you might trade one QB for another, but the team not improve, or even regress, because it's not an overall fit. But waaaaay too many people use them in isolation to support their pre-conceived ideas (and cherry-picking as needed).

 

[HungryLion]

or for QBs who suddenly get a receiver they trust and have chemistry with.

Bingo

Which isn’t a knock on a QB either IMO. They all need help.

 

[Future]

It is, and there are a lot of other factors that go into the time to release, but this is a creative way to try to quantify a QB's vision of the field that has some substance to it.

Right, I get that. I don't think this data set is perfect (though I do prefer Attempted Air Yards when talking about QB vision and that sort of thing), but when you look on a QB-to-QB basis, there isn't much variance as to how we view them. Brees and Brady are super efficient from the pocket. Wilson and Watson extend and make big plays. Goff has all day to throw, and that all comes out here.

What would be better is just a clean ratio, like AIYA per TT, but I don't have the time atm.

 

[HungryLion]

Well Dak has also been much better about getting through his reads. He's been way, way quicker to get to checkdowns, and I'm not sure how Amari would have changed that.

I think it’s fair to say that Dak is still developing.

The truth is. Dak was a major project QB coming out of college. Many thought that for him to have a chance, he needed years of development.

His rookie season changed expectations. But Dak has a lot of aspects of his game that need growth and maturation.

That’s the biggest disconnect between Dak detractors and Dak believers I think.

Dak detractors think that his shortcomings are things that cannot be improved or won’t be improved.

I actually think his weaknesses are things that can be improved with hard work and experience. Although there’s never a guarantee how much they will improve for any given player.

 

[DIAF]

Because you're misinterpreting the data to fit an opinion without understanding all the variables that make up the raw data.

The same can be said for you and everyone else dismissing the data, though.

 

[G2]

Unless you're comparing QBs within the same time span, I really don't see the relevance of comparing a -3 year QB with those that have had long careers. I'm much more interested in seeing Prescott continue to improve.

Every QB in the history of the NFL is flawed, no one QB has ever been close to perfect. Ever. So,

 

[CowboyRoy]

It's not bashing. Bashing is baseless and akin to "Dak sucks and is a backup." It's just a discussion of what Dak actually is as a passer which, generally speaking, is slow to progress through reads and struggles to deliver down the field.

It's only bashing to those who refuse to accept that Dak is flawed as a passer. Did I say he's not a starter in the league? Did I say Dallas can't win with him? Did I say that Blake Bortles is better?

To say a QB is flawed is like saying a QB isnt perfect. No kidding. Most have flaws. And hes only in his 3rd year. After the last 5 weeks and what Dak pulled off last week, seems rather trollish to come out with this kind of a thread. Shows your agenda. Its like you petty trolls are still riding high on the first half of the season. Did you miss the 5 game win streak?

What has Dak done since the Oline coach was fired and we got a real #1 receiver? That should be your focus. It doesnt take a genius to imagine what this kid could do in year #4 with a TE and a healthy Oline.

 

[G2]

Funny how when the stats show Dak in a positive light, it's "proof to the haters", but when they don't, it's "bashing".

That seems a little too general.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Funny how when the stats show Dak in a positive light, it's "proof to the haters", but when they don't, it's "bashing".

Runny, it's a dumb thread because it actually doesn't prove anything without actual video on every throw. Even then, videos can be misinterpreted due to a bias for or against the player. This thread's stats also don't show whether any particular receiver was covered or not during the time Dak was going through his progressions, one receiver at a time, and also how it might have affected his ability to release the ball quicker. Finally, take into account the lack of a true #1 WR and TE, plus an injury-riddled Oline for at least the 1st half of this season, well, obviously it would affect any QB in this league.

This is why it's an obvious BASH DAK thread, and a really dumb one at that, especially at this time after a 5 game win streak where Dak has seriously been lighting it up.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's not bashing. Bashing is baseless and akin to "Dak sucks and is a backup." It's just a discussion of what Dak actually is as a passer which, generally speaking, is slow to progress through reads and struggles to deliver down the field.

It's only bashing to those who refuse to accept that Dak is flawed as a passer. Did I say he's not a starter in the league? Did I say Dallas can't win with him? Did I say that Blake Bortles is better?

This is really the problem to me. It's really difficult to have any kind of intelligent discussion around these kinds of issues because everybody takes things so personal. This is really good information and it leads to really good discussion. I mean, why everything has to be turned into a holy war is beyond me but seems like that's kinda how it goes with these things.

I applaud you for opening this up to conversation. Good work Future!

 

[Runwildboys]

That seems a little too general.

My statement, or the stats provided in the OP?

 

[America's Cowboy]

To say a QB is flawed is like saying a QB isnt perfect. No kidding. Most have flaws. And hes only in his 3rd year. After the last 5 weeks and what Dak pulled off last week, seems rather trollish to come out with this kind of a thread. Shows your agenda. Its like you petty trolls are still riding high on the first half of the season. Did you miss the 5 game win streak?

What has Dak done since the Oline coach was fired and we got a real #1 receiver? That should be your focus. It doesnt take a genius to imagine what this kid could do in year #4 with a TE and a healthy Oline.

Exactly!!! This is obviously a trollish thread, especially one started from a known Dak basher. Dak lighting it up during this recent 5 game win streak must be killing him inside.

 

[G2]

My statement, or the stats provided in the OP?

Your statement.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Looks like you don't know how to read.

The ones with longer TT or comparable TT to Dak all throw the ball further down the field. Goff is over a yard ahead of Dak, and the stat isn't "Completed" its "Attempted."

Your point is that Dak holds the ball longer because he runs, which, duh. But of those who hold the ball the longest, Dak is most comparable to Bortles and Osweiler lol. It's literally right there in the data itself, not in the agenda.

You say duh, but your reason is that he doesn't process fast enough "greatly indicative", were your words, according to the data, but then if that's what the data says, why would an elite QB like Rodgers take longer? Is Rodgers slower at processing, after all it's "greatly indicative" of the data?

 

[DIAF]

There's also a trend in sports, especially with older fans, to dismiss any stat that isn't a traditional ratio or counting stat as "made up" because some nerd with a computer came up with it. But those nerds with computers are the reason why the Astros have a WS Trophy. Mathematics and the deeper dive they provide reveal relationships between data points that can be manipulated to provide better outcomes. Its the reason why MLB teams are beefing up with analysts.

 

[CowboyRoy]

The same can be said for you and everyone else dismissing the data, though.

Data without factoring in the variables surrounding the data is pointless. Why has Dak been so much better these last 5 games as compared to the first 8? Why have his stats suddenly gone to the top of the QB charts during that time?

If you cant see the answer to this question then there is no hope for you.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Good point. But that's really my point. It is less important what the stat says for an individual, than how that individual fits and performs within the team. If you simply based a personnel decision on these stats, you might trade one QB for another, but the team not improve, or even regress, because it's not an overall fit. But waaaaay too many people use them in isolation to support their pre-conceived ideas (and cherry-picking as needed).

I think the Vikings are learning that the hard way.