Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:15 pm
  • If you needed anymore reason to not trust this new ratings system that does not have a publicly released formula, here it is.

    Sando on his NFC West blog was commenting on this subject here: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... nick-oh-my

    There was no surprise in seeing Wilson emerge from that game with an 85.4 QBR score for the game. He was that good.


    Russells stats for that game: We know, 60 percent pass completion, 2 tds no picks 1 sack taken

    For Colin Kapernicus:

    A case could be made that he cost his team the game with a poor decision leading to a safety and a botched pitch. That is why I was quite surprised to see QBR reward Kaepernick with an 82.4 score Sunday.


    So our qb barely got a marginally higher QBR than a quarterback that gave, singlehandedly, 9 points to the other team.

    Colins Stats: 6.5 yds per attempt 65 percent comp rushed for about the same yardage, slightly higher.

    Remember how RW balled against the jets but fell to a sub 40 QBR because of the fumble td? How is colin higher despite doing the same thing, and giving up a safety?

    I call :242735:
    Image
    User avatar
    KitsapHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 834
    Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:04 pm
    Location: Behind you


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:16 pm
  • Wasn't Brady Quinn the highest QBR this week? At like 90 something points. I think that is all the proof you need haha.
    User avatar
    sturg78
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1114
    Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:03 pm


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:17 pm
  • sturg78 wrote:Wasn't Brady Quinn the highest QBR this week? At like 90 something points. I think that is all the proof you need haha.

    I think that's proof that the Mayans were right, and the world really is ending.
    Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???


    2013 Adopt-a-rookie: #humblethug
    2014 Adopt-a-rookie: Kevin Norwood
    User avatar
    razgriz737
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1580
    Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
    Location: Spokane/Seattle


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:18 pm
  • KitsapHawk wrote:If you needed anymore reason to not trust this new ratings system that does not have a publicly released formula, here it is.

    Sando on his NFC West blog was commenting on this subject here: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... nick-oh-my

    There was no surprise in seeing Wilson emerge from that game with an 85.4 QBR score for the game. He was that good.


    Russells stats for that game: We know, 60 percent pass completion, 2 tds no picks 1 sack taken

    For Colin Kapernicus:

    A case could be made that he cost his team the game with a poor decision leading to a safety and a botched pitch. That is why I was quite surprised to see QBR reward Kaepernick with an 82.4 score Sunday.


    So our qb barely got a marginally higher QBR than a quarterback that gave, singlehandedly, 9 points to the other team.

    Colins Stats: 6.5 yds per attempt 65 percent comp rushed for about the same yardage, slightly higher.

    Remember how RW balled against the jets but fell to a sub 40 QBR because of the fumble td? How is colin higher despite doing the same thing, and giving up a safety?

    I call :242735:


    Yeah something seems very fishy in that. I prefer to stick to Aikmans good old rating system thats been around so long, for whatever it's worth. Don't put a ton of stock into it either though.
    User avatar
    bellingerga
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5313
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:28 pm
    Location: Beaverton, Oregon


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:19 pm
  • It was because of a mistake in their formula. They called the pitch a failed play, and they are trying to fix that now so they can attribute all the blame to Kaepernick.

    And Wilson's score against the Jets was low because he didn't play so well when the game was close, but played really well when the game was out of reach for the Jets.

    But yeah, QBR has it's chinks in it's armor. I like it better than passer rating though.

    And to sturg, even horrible QB's have good games :Dunno:
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5228
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:24 pm
  • I am sure they do, my comment was mostly tongue in cheek.
    User avatar
    sturg78
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1114
    Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:03 pm


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:54 pm
  • I've never been a big fan of QB rating.. the ESPN version or the regular. For this precise reason. Andrew Luck's rating for example is 76.1. Christian Ponder's is 79.4 ..

    Alex Smith's rating is 104. Russell Wilson's is 95.

    Who are you building a team around now? Not Christian Ponder. Not Alex Smith.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 4841
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:11 pm
  • QBR is a work in progress. It's in the right track but some aspects of play are over valued IMO
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1859
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:35 pm
  • Kaepernick also lead the entire game in rushing, so he gets a little bonus for that too
    ----
    ensett
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1522
    Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:26 am


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:18 am
  • bwahh, Harbaugh has quite the debacle on his hands at this point, pull Kapp and put alex in he was wrong all along, Kapp loses against Miami and he's a loser..

    heres my take, Kapp failed under pressure, (takes his eyes off the back just before he pitches the ball looking for the hit) but he definitely has the better arm, can the niners use an arm like that? sure if the receivers buck up and stop dropping those fast balls, I think its clear with a certain amount of pressure you can get Kapp to release early and throw fast balls, forcing receivers to drop balls and miss routes, like they did

    Rams played superlatively with a diminished squad, hats off
    GO HAWKS!!!
    User avatar
    Twisted
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1554
    Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:29 pm


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:32 am
  • 85.4 is a really,really good "QBR" rating. The max possible is 100. It's setup so that 50 is supposed to be average.

    What's the problem, here? Are we getting greedy here, fellow Seahawks fans?

    Not getting pleasured enough by the National Media, as usual?
    Image
    User avatar
    minormillikin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1669
    Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 12:32 pm
    Location: East Oly


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:16 am
  • hawksfan515 wrote:But yeah, QBR has it's chinks in it's armor. I like it better than passer rating though.


    I disagree. QB rating does have flaws, but those flaws are quibble worthy. At least with passer rating, you get a pretty accurate picture of whether a QB was good or bad. QBR's flaws make me think it's worthless. It's capable of saying a terrible performance was actually a great performance and vice versa. And their "clutch factor" is just silly. Scoring points in garbage time when down by 30 is one thing, but a score that takes your team from a 10 point lead to a 17 point lead is still huge in my book, and should not be discounted. Failing to build a big lead can cost you the game some times.

    If you want a perfect stat, ANYA is pretty close. DVOA is solid (for a play tracking stat) as well. I think those stats match the eyeball test the best.

    minormillikin wrote:85.4 is a really,really good "QBR" rating. The max possible is 100. It's setup so that 50 is supposed to be average.


    He's not referring to Wilson's last game, but talking about instances where QBR has been hilariously off the mark this season. Regarding Wilson, his QBR for the season was just league average until the last two weeks. It's currently at around 60 or so.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10890
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:23 am
  • Hasselbeck wrote:I've never been a big fan of QB rating.. the ESPN version or the regular. For this precise reason. Andrew Luck's rating for example is 76.1. Christian Ponder's is 79.4 ..

    Alex Smith's rating is 104. Russell Wilson's is 95.

    Who are you building a team around now? Not Christian Ponder. Not Alex Smith.


    Good points. Though really, I think what you are getting at underscores the impossibility of stats painting a consistently perfect picture in a team sport like football.

    That said, Andrew Luck deserves his 76.1 rating. He's on pace for over 20 interceptions this season (and a ton of fumbles as well). Throwing over an interception per game is a great way for a QB to kill his value. In fairness to Luck, he's been winning games anyway.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10890
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:09 am
  • In any case, as long as you're aware of what these stats are measuring, there's nothing wrong with QB Rating or "QBR."

    Any fools who think either of these stats accurately assess a QB's value, and use the ratings as some sort of numb-skull's ammunition, are probably too dumb to feed and clothe themselves.
    Image
    User avatar
    minormillikin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1669
    Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 12:32 pm
    Location: East Oly


Re: Proof that ESPN's QBR is a sham
Tue Dec 04, 2012 4:08 am
  • The total qbr, seems like crap, plain qbr is better though still not great.
    User avatar
    Uffda
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 704
    Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:13 am
    Location: Ballard




It is currently Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:55 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information