Quarterback rating

[AdamJT13]

A little bit more difficult to incorporate

Not that difficult. The length of the pass when it's caught and the yards gained after the catch already are tracked.

 

[theogt]

But a 1-yard TD pass to a wide open tight end significantly raises your passer rating. In his prime, Troy Aikman threw barely more than one TD per game, while Emmitt Smith annually led the league in touchdowns because we mostly punched it into the end zone on the ground. Would Aikman have been a better passer if he had gotten four or five more short TD passes each season? No, but his rating would have been much higher.

Personally, I think the length of the passes -- not the length of completions -- should be part of the equation. A screen pass that goes for 20 yards is not equal to a post pass that goes for 20.

Part of the problem here is that many times, if the QB leads his WR correctly, he'll get more YAC. So you're negating positive yardage that are at least partially the result of the QB.

It's hard to say which is less valid.

 

[kmd24]

I disagree with that. In no other situation does the defense go all out against the run than they do on the goalline. Plenty, if not the majority, of TD passes thrown inside the 5 yard line come off playaction boots where the defense bit on the run fake and left the TE sitting all alone in the back of the endzone.

I don't know how you can even know that. Given virtually similar running situation, it's pretty easy to complete a short pass to the TE on playaction. I would be interested in a methodology to prove or disprove this idea.

You can check the situational stats of almost any quarterback and see that his completion percentage in the red zone is lower than his completion percentage anywhere else on the field. His TD percentage in this range will often be higher as well. These two pieces of data suggest that passes that are most likely to result in TD's are harder to complete. QED

 

[kmd24]

But a 1-yard TD pass to a wide open tight end significantly raises your passer rating.

A valid point, but you are arguing about the relative value of a TD pass, not whether a pass that results in a TD should weigh more than one that does not.

I do agree that incorporating the length of the pass (and ideally, the length of the throw rather than the length of the completion) would help in differentiating passing skill.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I don't know how you can even know that. Given virtually similar running situation, it's pretty easy to complete a short pass to the TE on playaction. I would be interested in a methodology to prove or disprove this idea.

I don't know why this would be difficult to grasp. It's pretty much common sense. Most of the time defenses consider it a positive play when they can hold you to a two yard run .... not so when you're on the two yard line. In no other situation do you regularly see 9 men in the box. In no other situation do teams regularly utilizing 5 defensive lineman. Therefore, in no other position of the field do you see team's as committed to stopping the run, at the expense of pass defense, as you see inside the 5 yard line. Which is why you often see TE's standing all alone, without anyone within 10 yards of them, on playaction.

 

[AdamJT13]

Part of the problem here is that many times, if the QB leads his WR correctly, he'll get more YAC. So you're negating positive yardage that are at least partially the result of the QB.

I didn't mean to imply YAC should be negated, although my post might read that way. By "length of the passes, not the length of completions," I was simply differentiating between where the ball is caught and how many yards the play gained. I'd have the length of the actual pass factored into whatever equation is used. I wasn't saying the total yards gained shouldn't also be part of it -- or, at least, I didn't mean to. I edited my other post to better reflect what I was trying to say.

 

[kmd24]

I don't know why this would be difficult to grasp. It's pretty much common sense. Most of the time defenses consider it a positive play when they can hold you to a two yard run .... not so when you're on the two yard line. In no other situation do you regularly see 9 men in the box. In no other situation do teams regularly utilizing 5 defensive lineman. Therefore, in no other position of the field do you see team's as committed to stopping the run, at the expense of pass defense, as you see inside the 5 yard line. Which is why you often see TE's standing all alone, without anyone within 10 yards of them, on playaction.

I agree that a pass to a wide open TE is an easy play, but that doesn't establish anything.

You are only looking at the result of a given set of plays (the successful ones), not the aggregate of all plays in such situations. The TE isn't always wide open, and I doubt there is any easy way to determine the percentage of time he is.

Furthermore, if the TE is covered, he is often the only option, or one of two options. If he's covered, the QB may have to throw it away.

OTOH, the set of plays that result in short completions from other spots on the field is probably just as high percentage - and probably higher - judging from the situational statistics that most QB's post.

 

[theogt]

Just a side note: No other stat correlates higher with winning percentage than QB rating. And that goes for both offense and defense.

 

[Freyguy]

Here it is:

Four categories are used as a basis for compiling a rating:

• Percentage of completions per attempt
• Average yards gained per attempt
• Percentage of touchdown passes per attempt
• Percentage of interceptions per attempt

Remember that the statistic presented here measures passers, not quarterbacks - it does not quantify leadership, play calling, tenacity, or any of the other attributes of a great quarterback.

There are four individual steps in making the calculation - here is the math for each step:

Step 1: Start with completion percentage. Subtract 30 and

divide by 20.

Step 2: Yards per attempt. Subtract 3 and divide by 4.

Step 3: Touchdown passes divided by pass attempts and multiply by 20.

Alternatively, divide the touchdown percentage by 5.

Step 4: Start with 2.375. Subtract from that the interception percentage

(interceptions divided by pass attempts) divided by 4.

(Note: Sum of each step cannot be greater than 2.375 or less than 0.)

Add the sum of 1-4, multiply by 100 and divide by 6.

http://www.baseball-statistics.com/Greats/Century/passer-rating.htm

 

[AdamJT13]

A valid point, but you are arguing about the relative value of a TD pass, not whether a pass that results in a TD should weigh more than one that does not.

I'm mostly arguing against short TD passes being valued the same as longer TD passes, which benefits quarterbacks whose teams throw more inside the 5-yard line and hurts quarterbacks whose teams just run it in.

 

[dallasfaniac]

I'm mostly arguing against short TD passes being valued the same as longer TD passes, which benefits quarterbacks whose teams throw more inside the 5-yard line and hurts quarterbacks whose teams just run it in.

Speaking of running it in, what about QBs that run the ball for a TD? They need to do away with the term 'Quarterback Rating' and just call it 'Passer Rating'.

 

[AdamJT13]

Just a side note: No other stat correlates higher with winning percentage than QB rating. And that goes for both offense and defense.

I'm pretty sure that other methods of measuring passing efficiency have a higher correlation. But there's no doubt that passing efficiency has the highest correlation.

 

[AsthmaField]

I'm mostly arguing against short TD passes being valued the same as longer TD passes, which benefits quarterbacks whose teams throw more inside the 5-yard line and hurts quarterbacks whose teams just run it in.

That makes sense, particularly when you think of Aikman and how having Emmitt and the OL cut down on his short TD passes. Also, I do agree that somehow the YAC yards should be accounted for in the passer rating. Theo is correct that a more accurate pass will allow for more YAC... however, the actual length of the pass should come into play as well. i.e. total pass yardage - YAC = actual pass length.

If all three of those could be incorporated into the passer rating, it would be a more accurate representation of who the better QB is, IMO.

 

[AbeBeta]

Just a side note: No other stat correlates higher with winning percentage than QB rating. And that goes for both offense and defense.

That's a pretty solid "ain't broke" post right there.

Unless one of yous arguing against QB rating can come up with a QB stat that is a better predictor of winning %, then this argument should pretty much be over.

 

[dallasfaniac]

I would think that Rex Grossman has disproved the correlation between winning and QB rating. :laugh2:

 

[kmd24]

That's a pretty solid "ain't broke" post right there.

Unless one of yous arguing against QB rating can come up with a QB stat that is a better predictor of winning %, then this argument should pretty much be over.

Aikman claims that his efficiency statistic correlates to winning percentage better than passer rating.

Just because something is good doesn't mean it can't be better.

 

[AbeBeta]

Aikman claims that his efficiency statistic correlates to winning percentage better than passer rating.

Just because something is good doesn't mean it can't be better.

Claims -- let's see the stats then...

 

[theogt]

I'm pretty sure that other methods of measuring passing efficiency have a higher correlation. But there's no doubt that passing efficiency has the highest correlation.

I agree, but the point is to ward off all the "QB Rating is a horrible stat" silliness.

Also, since it's the best we have, there's likely never going to be any serious push to make it better.

 

[theogt]

Aikman claims that his efficiency statistic correlates to winning percentage better than passer rating.

Just because something is good doesn't mean it can't be better.

The AER contains stats for the entire team, so it only stands to reason that it'd be a better indicator of success than any single stat for any single position.

 

[AdamJT13]

Speaking of running it in, what about QBs that run the ball for a TD? They need to do away with the term 'Quarterback Rating' and just call it 'Passer Rating'.

That IS what it's called.