Best and Worst scores of QBs TD%, INT%, Comp% and YPA, the last two seasons

Interesting. The two graphics pertain to z-Scores..? May as well dismiss the minus z-Score graphic entirely.

Six of seven teams, led by quarterbacks with z-Scores ranging from 3.00 to 4.89, never advanced to their 2023 or 2024 conference championship games. Dak Prescott was one of the six quarterbacks and named as an AP All-Pro second teamer for 2023 (link). The other five quarterbacks were not named as All-Pros.

Within that grouping, the seventh team, Baltimore, was led by All-Pro first teamer Lamar Jackson. Jackson had a z-Score of 3.75. The 2023 Ravens fell to the Chiefs 17-10 in the AFC Championship.

The three remaining teams were led by quarterbacks with z-Scores from 4.99 to 6.81. Of those three quarterbacks, the non All-Pro Brock Purdy's 49ers beat the non All-Pro Jared Goff's Lions 34-31 in the NFC Championship.

The third quarterback in that upper-tier grouping, Jackson, had a z-Score of 6.81, nearly double his score from the previous season, and was named All-Pro first team for the second consecutive year (link). His Ravens fell to All-Pro second teamer Josh Allen's Bills team in the AFC Divisional Round 27-25. Allen (z-Score unknown) fell 32-29 to the Chiefs the following week.

Not sure if there is an applicable correlation between z-Scores, All-Pro status, and their team's ultimate outlook for that season. For example, Joe Burrow's z-Score of 3.89 eclipsed Jackson's 3.75. Yet, the Bengals finished 9-8 last season and out of the playoffs. Sure. The AP did not named him as an All-Pro, but Pro Football Focus did as a second teamer.

Perhaps, what is most hoped for, is a team and quarterback playing well and BETTER than their opponent whenever it matters most. I do not know. z-Scores are tricky.

/rant
 
Z-scores are calculated by taking an individual's data point for a variable (i.e. TD%, COMP% etc.), subtracting the mean for the entire league for that data point and dividing by standard deviation for the distribution of that variable.

z = (x - μ) / σ

It gives you a sense of how a person fairs compared to the league average, while also accounting for variance. Z-scores would be a better way to report statistics, in my opinion.

I dunno why you would add Z-scores for different metrics. I guess that's fine, but the statistic overlap so there is some implicit weighting.
 
BaybeeJay said:
Z-scores are calculated by taking an individual's data point for a variable (i.e. TD%, COMP% etc.), subtracting the mean for the entire league for that data point and dividing by standard deviation for the distribution of that variable.

z = (x - μ) / σ

It gives you a sense of how a person fairs compared to the league average, while also accounting for variance. Z-scores would be a better way to report statistics, in my opinion.

I dunno why you would add Z-scores for different metrics. I guess that's fine, but the statistic overlap so there is some implicit weighting.
Click to expand...
Basically WAR, but for football.
 
MountaineerCowboy said:
Basically WAR, but for football.
Click to expand...
I don't know if WAR accounts for variance in the way a Z-score does. But generally, yes it gives you a sense of a player relative to an average benchmark (albeit also correcting for variance).

Z-scores are used extensively in scientific research.
 
DallasEast said:
Interesting. The two graphics pertain to z-Scores..? May as well dismiss the minus z-Score graphic entirely.

Six of seven teams, led by quarterbacks with z-Scores ranging from 3.00 to 4.89, never advanced to their 2023 or 2024 conference championship games. Dak Prescott was one of the six quarterbacks and named as an AP All-Pro second teamer for 2023 (link). The other five quarterbacks were not named as All-Pros.

Within that grouping, the seventh team, Baltimore, was led by All-Pro first teamer Lamar Jackson. Jackson had a z-Score of 3.75. The 2023 Ravens fell to the Chiefs 17-10 in the AFC Championship.

The three remaining teams were led by quarterbacks with z-Scores from 4.99 to 6.81. Of those three quarterbacks, the non All-Pro Brock Purdy's 49ers beat the non All-Pro Jared Goff's Lions 34-31 in the NFC Championship.

The third quarterback in that upper-tier grouping, Jackson, had a z-Score of 6.81, nearly double his score from the previous season, and was named All-Pro first team for the second consecutive year (link). His Ravens fell to All-Pro second teamer Josh Allen's Bills team in the AFC Divisional Round 27-25. Allen (z-Score unknown) fell 32-29 to the Chiefs the following week.

Not sure if there is an applicable correlation between z-Scores, All-Pro status, and their team's ultimate outlook for that season. For example, Joe Burrow's z-Score of 3.89 eclipsed Jackson's 3.75. Yet, the Bengals finished 9-8 last season and out of the playoffs. Sure. The AP did not named him as an All-Pro, but Pro Football Focus did as a second teamer.

Perhaps, what is most hoped for, is a team and quarterback playing well and BETTER than their opponent whenever it matters most. I do not know. z-Scores are tricky.

/rant
Click to expand...
or maybe it is an indication that there is more to team success than just the QB....defenses, running game, special teams play, and coaches all say don't forget about me.
 
DallasEast said:
Interesting. The two graphics pertain to z-Scores..? May as well dismiss the minus z-Score graphic entirely.

Six of seven teams, led by quarterbacks with z-Scores ranging from 3.00 to 4.89, never advanced to their 2023 or 2024 conference championship games. Dak Prescott was one of the six quarterbacks and named as an AP All-Pro second teamer for 2023 (link). The other five quarterbacks were not named as All-Pros.

Within that grouping, the seventh team, Baltimore, was led by All-Pro first teamer Lamar Jackson. Jackson had a z-Score of 3.75. The 2023 Ravens fell to the Chiefs 17-10 in the AFC Championship.

The three remaining teams were led by quarterbacks with z-Scores from 4.99 to 6.81. Of those three quarterbacks, the non All-Pro Brock Purdy's 49ers beat the non All-Pro Jared Goff's Lions 34-31 in the NFC Championship.

The third quarterback in that upper-tier grouping, Jackson, had a z-Score of 6.81, nearly double his score from the previous season, and was named All-Pro first team for the second consecutive year (link). His Ravens fell to All-Pro second teamer Josh Allen's Bills team in the AFC Divisional Round 27-25. Allen (z-Score unknown) fell 32-29 to the Chiefs the following week.

Not sure if there is an applicable correlation between z-Scores, All-Pro status, and their team's ultimate outlook for that season. For example, Joe Burrow's z-Score of 3.89 eclipsed Jackson's 3.75. Yet, the Bengals finished 9-8 last season and out of the playoffs. Sure. The AP did not named him as an All-Pro, but Pro Football Focus did as a second teamer.

Perhaps, what is most hoped for, is a team and quarterback playing well and BETTER than their opponent whenever it matters most. I do not know. z-Scores are tricky.

/rant
Click to expand...
You could run a regression analysis between these z-scores and team record to compute an r-value.

The problem comparing All-pro status (discrete) and z-scores (continuous) is that they are different types of variables.
 
MountaineerCowboy said:
You’ll see an older, more wear and tear version of the Dak you’ve always seen for as long as he lasts (I say under 8 games).

Then the back up will come in and the team will either play the same or better than they did with Dak.

Just like always.
Click to expand...
But i heard he's in the best shape of his life.
 
I was gonna ask what a z-score was but after reading the first 3 or so posts I don’t think I care anymore lol…
 
BaybeeJay said:
You could run a regression analysis between these z-scores and team record to compute an r-value.

The problem comparing All-pro status (discrete) and z-scores (continuous) is that they are different types of variables.
Click to expand...
oh, interesting take, now if we did that and use Sin(r-value) over the years (1- infiniti) and invert that using sigma correction factor, then you really have something that can measure things properly.
 
2024 never happened.

Dak was running for his life in those first 8 games, the O-line was not playing well at the time, there was no real 2nd option as a receiver, the running game was non-existent and the defense was MIA.

These are not "excuses", they are the reasons as to why no QB in this league could have possibly succeeded.

It would be blatantly unfair to judge Dak by the first 8 games of 2024.

I don't know how Dak will play in 2025 but considering the upgrades, I believe it will be closer to the 2023 version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 38 more.
Total: 1,573 (members: 138, guests: 1,435)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
466,254
Messages
13,925,066
Members
23,796
Latest member
OZ-BOY-COUNTRY
Back
Top