Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Big fan of Fentry, mahself

Current Players bound for the Hall... Let The Debate Begin

Recommended Posts

Rivers is not HoF caliber. Are we seriously discussing this? Has he ever even been the best QB in his division? Draft class? Nope.

 

Rivers has been playing at a high level for the last 1.5 years.  The question is how many more years + Super Bowls does he need to bump him up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivers has been playing at a high level for the last 1.5 years.  The question is how many more years + Super Bowls does he need to bump him up?

 

1.5 years of good service gets your in the HoF discussion? Is he any better now than he was in '10/'11 when he had near identical stats? I don't think so. 

 

 

1c6wR.jpg

 

I think he is the best of the middle of the pack. He has consistently been beat up by the better QBs. I don't think he gets a pass because he is playing against Brees, Rodgers, Manning, Brady & etc. They are the opponents of his era and he is not defeating them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were people seriously saying Patrick Peterson?  Really?  Per Rotowire:


 


Peterson's play hasn't matched his name or his contract this season. He's graded out as Pro Football Focus' 90th cover corner out of 107 qualifiers, surrendering five touchdowns in his coverage.


 


Can you say OVERRATED?


 


PS-- Champ Bailey just retired, he's a DB who DOES deserve to be in Canton.  Also per Rotowire:  Astonishingly, Bailey missed just 14 games between 1999-2012. He was a 12-time Pro Bowler, and No. 26 on the all-time interceptions list.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being above average throughout your career won't get you in. If we apply this Phillip Rivers' discussion logic, Phil Simms was a first ballot no brainer.

 

No way.  For one, Phil Simms was not above average throughout his career.  He was bad/below average for the first part, and solidly average for most of it, ranking among the league's 5 best passers just twice.  Simms' league rank (among passers w/ 200+ attempts) in AY/A as well as win-loss by year:

 

1979: 19th/28 (6-5)

1980: 28th/30 (3-10)

1981: 17th/30 (5-5)

1982: DNP

1983: DNQ

1984: 9th/30 (9-7)

1985: 7th/30 (10-6)

1986: 14th/30 (14-2) *SUPER BOWL MVP*

1987: 3rd/27 (4-5) *strike year*

1988: 9th/29 (9-6)

1989: 8th/29 (11-4)

1990: 5th/28 (11-3)

1991: DNQ (141 attempts, would have been 10th/33)

1992: DNQ (137 attempts, would have been 13th/29)

1993: 5th/31 (11-5)

 

That puts Simms at 95-64 for his career (significantly above average w-l record).  I like AY/A+ (that is, AY/A adjusted to the league average for each season, where average = 100) to compare quarterbacks of different eras, because it factors out changes in the game and only compares to the performance of players in your era.  Simms' career mark is 107; that's good for 34th out of 118 quarterbacks who attempted at least 2000 passes in the common-draft era (ie post-1970).

 

Rivers, by comparison:

 

2004: DNQ

2005: DNQ

2006: 8th/33 (14-2) - AFC West: 1. Huard (KC), 2. Rivers, 3. Plummer (Den) 4. Walters (Oak); 2004 Draftees: 1. Rivers, 2. Occasional Rapist, 3. Manning

2007: 16th/35 (11-5) - AFC West: 1. Cutler (Den) 2. Rivers, 3. Huard (KC), 4. Croyle (KC); 2004 Draftees: 1. Occasional Rapist, 2. Rivers, 3. Manning

2008: 1st/34 (8-8 ) - AFC West: 1. Rivers, 2. Cutler (Den), 3. Russell (Oak), 4. Thigpen (KC); 2004 Draftees: 1. Rivers, 2. Manning, 3. Occasional Rapist

2009: 1st/33 (13-3) - AFC West: 1. Rivers, 2. Orton (Den), 3. Cassel (KC), 4. Russell (Oak); 2004 Draftees: 1. Rivers, 2. Occasional Rapist, 3. Manning

2010: 2nd/33 (9-7) - AFC West: 1. Rivers, 2. Cassell (KC) 3. Orton (Den) 4. Campbell (Oak); 2004 Draftees 1. Rivers, 2 Occasional Rapist, 3. Manning

2011: 10th/34 (8-8 ) - AFC West: 1. Rivers, 2. Palmer (Oak) 3. Orton (Den) 4 Cassel (KC); 2004 Draftees: 1. Manning, 2. Occasional Rapist, 3. Rivers

2012: 19th/36 (7-9) - AFC West: 1. P. Manning (Den), 2. Palmer (Oak), 3. Rivers, 4. Cassel (KC); 2004 Draftees: 1. Occasional Rapist, 2. Manning, 3. Rivers

2013: 6th/39 (9-7) - AFC West: 1. P. Manning (Den), 2. Rivers, 3. A. Smith (KC), 4. McGloin (Oak); 2004 Draftees: 1. Rivers, 2. Occasional Rapist, 3. Manning

2014: 3rd/32 (5-3) - AFC West: 1. P. Manning (Den), 2. Rivers, 3. A. Smith (KC) 4. Carr (Oak); 2004 Draftees: 1. Rivers, 2. Occasional Rapist, 3. Manning

 

That puts Rivers' career W-L at 84-52 (well above average).  More impressively, he has a career AY/A+ of 116, good for 7th among the 118 players since 1970 with 2000 or more pass attempts.  Here are the players ahead of him:

 

1. Aaron Rodgers (126)

2. Steve Young (125)

3. Roger Staubach (122)

4. Peyton Manning (118)

5. Joe Montana (118)

6. Tom Brady (116)

 

The Occasional Rapist is 11th on the list, and Eli Manning is 87th.

 

So, I'm going to come right out and say it: Move over, Fouts and Elway - Philip Rivers is the best AFC West quarterback OF ALL-TIME!

 

(But seriously, I found Rivers' numbers far better than even I expected them to be.  Dude has been very, very good - no WAY you can describe what he's done as "above average")

 

 

EDIT: had to make 8-8 not be 8-8)

Edited by deadfaulkner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AY/A = [passing yards + 20*(Passing TD) - 45*(Passing INT) ] / (passes attempted)


 


I'm not impressed with this arbitrary formula.  Not enough to bank Rivers in the HoF on.


 


Put the pencil, paper, calculator, q-tips, and spreadsheets down; let the statistics take backseat for a moment, and watch Rivers in the big games.  You will see failure when and where it counts.


 


Again, I like Rivers as a football player and enjoy watching him sometimes, but the dude chokes.  I would call Rivers a Romo with a little-bit larger balls.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not impressed with playoffs wins in a team game involving many many other coaches and players.


 


I can use your logic for Brady. Ever since New England became an offensive team Brady has "choked" in every big game. 


 


2007 loses to marginal playoff super bowl team in playoffs despite being favored by 13 pts only throws 1 td and 5.5 y/a. despite having the "greatest offense ever" 


2009 loses home game to ravens favored by 4. Brady throws 3 picks. Plays like a turd


2010 Pats favored by 10 but lose to Jets. Brady plays pretty well but still favored by 10 this is a choke. 


2011 Chokes in Super Bowl. Brady can't win the big one as he's outplayed by Eli and the 9-7 giants. 


2012 loses another home game to the Ravens favored by 7.5. Shits the bed with 53% comp and 2 picks. 


2013 good game but with neither team's defense worth a shit he loses to peyton at home.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Counterpoint to Rivers advanced metrics: The guys who vote in QBs to the HOF don't use advance metrics


 


Here are your HOF QBs who played in the 90s in the two major QB Groups


 

Guys who won Super Bowls that put up above average to crazy numbers

Troy Aikman 1989-2000

Joe Montana 1979-1994

Steve Young 1985-1999

John Elway 1983-1998

 

Guys that put up crazy numbers but didn't win Super Bowls

Jim Kelly 1986-1996

Dan Marino 1983-1999

Warren Moon 1984-2000

 

He might get there if he really pushes it but right now Rivers doesn't belong in either group and it's doubtful that he will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man, I can probably count on two hands how many times I've seen Rivers with a chance for a game-winning drive, but he just can't do it.  he ends up making wack throws.  I see it every season.


 


why is talking about Rivers cause the Brady hate?  nobody said anything about Brady.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2013/quarterbacks-game-winning-drive-study

 

Well, since the 2009 playoff loss to the Jets, Rivers is 2-19 (.095) at GWD opportunities. He's turned the ball over 16 times in the fourth quarter or overtime, tied or trailing by 1-8 points in that time. That's unbelievably bad. Romo gets the choker label, yet he's had 10 career turnovers in clutch situations the Cowboys lost. Rivers has 22. He might have lesser stats here with the touchdowns and points per drive had he just made the simple plays to set up some winning field goals the last three seasons. Instead, no quarterback has blown more close games in recent time than Rivers.

 

dude rips Rivers apart.  22 turnovers to Romo's 10 in clutch situations, for example.  you could also add some chokes for the last season and a half, I'm sure of it.

 

this is exactly what I'm saying.  Choker >>>>> "high AY/A number".

Edited by buck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bruddog's stats and buck's exceptional football observational memory ftw.

 

Good call. I just used my Jedi mind to know he sucks, but you could actually remember it.

 

They can't let this guy in. Look at him.

philip-rivers-face-derp.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude rips Rivers apart.  22 turnovers to Romo's 10 in clutch situations, for example.  you could also add some chokes for the last season and a half, I'm sure of it.

 

this is exactly what I'm saying.  Choker >>>>> "high AY/A number".

 

philip.rivers.face.350x200.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Knobbe


 


The issue when I click on "Quote" or "MultiQuote" it goes into the box where I can reply to a quote as it normally did before, but the quotes I want to reply to aren't there. They used to be, but I never had this problem until the last week or so.


 


 


Re: Rivers


 


I wouldn't consider him, but he just got slaughtered over the last page. Whoever posted the 4th qtr Rivers/ Romo #'s, that's a good look, I did not realize that. Romo has made some bone head decisions, can't den that, but Rivers - by stats at least - is far worse in the clutch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AY/A = [passing yards + 20*(Passing TD) - 45*(Passing INT) ] / (passes attempted)

 

I'm not impressed with this arbitrary formula.  Not enough to bank Rivers in the HoF on.

 

Put the pencil, paper, calculator, q-tips, and spreadsheets down; let the statistics take backseat for a moment, and watch Rivers in the big games.  You will see failure when and where it counts.

 

Again, I like Rivers as a football player and enjoy watching him sometimes, but the dude chokes.  I would call Rivers a Romo with a little-bit larger balls.

 

That's fine and fair, but the formula is not arbitrary.  The multipliers 20 and 45 may seem like nice round numbers, but they aren't just numbers that were pulled out of thin air; they're based on drive research that originated in the seminal football research book The Hidden Game of Football (very recommended for any fan of the game who has even a minor interest in numbers) and has been updated by the PFR researchers.  A few entries in the PFR blog shed a lot of light on value stats, starting with the value of yards, then moving to the value of touchdowns, and finally moving to the value of a passing touchdown:

 

 

 

 

You may not enjoy these sorts of metrics, but I just wanted to emphasize that there is a thorough theoretical basis behind AY/A (unlike Passer Rating, which throws a bunch of QB stats into a big arbitrary soup).  But I feel that rate stats like this (as opposed to count stats like completion pct or td passes) are useful for QBs because they can consolidate a number of different behaviors into one number for the purposes of comparison.

 

And isn't that what we do when we talk about the HoF?  We look at one guy, and we compare him to the guys he played with.  So I'm going to keep my calculator, pencils, and spreadsheets at the ready.

 

 

 

I honestly don't know when I became the official Philip Rivers apologist of T-Borg.  I can promise you that before my offhand comment about him in this thread, I had no feelings about the guy either way, other than thinking he was pretty good.

 

I found this article interesting, but also very dubious for reasons that the author himself points out:

 

Nine drives could be the equivalent of one game, or many times just a fraction of one game. Even with Peyton Manninghaving 49 games, that's maybe five or six full games for his career. The magnitude of these drives deciding who won and lost cannot be ignored, but neither can the sample size issue. So tread lightly on the conclusions even though certain trends certainly show up for different players

 

Baseball sabermetricians will remind you that there is no such thing as a "clutch hitter" in baseball. Although a few moments in a player's career might stick out in our memory (either positive like Joe Carter or negative like Carlos Beltran), over time, a guy's performance in "clutch" situations becomes exactly consistent with the way he performs over the rest of his career.  If a guy is a .280 hitter for his career, then he is going to be a .280 hitter in clutch situations given a large enough sample size of clutch situations.

 

One problem with football metrics is that the sample sizes are already MUCH smaller than most other sports.  This article narrows that sample even further.

 

The comment that stood out to people in bruddog's posted article was talking about 19 drives in Philip Rivers' career that happened between 2010 and 2012.  It's common for people to look at a number like that and say, "Aha!  Told you so!"  But that's just a case of looking for a number to tell you what you think you already know.  

 

I watch a LOT of football.  Certainly not every game - the usual 4 or 5 games a week (I hate RedZone - I much prefer to actually watch a single, full game) that an intense fan will watch.  I haven't counted how many Chargers' games I've watched since 2006, but if I had to make a guess, I'd say, what, 20?  30?  Rivers has played 141 games in his career.  How many drives is that?  1,400?  2,000?  It's certainly up in that region somewhere.

 

Another thing that the author of this article failed to mention in his editorial on Rivers is that, before 2010, his results on such drives were VERY good (the article's statistics point that out), and that Rivers is completing 80% of his passes on such drives over his career.  Reggie Jackson grounded out to second in October plenty of times, but Reggie was a home run hitter, so ultimately he hit home runs.  Rivers, by comparison, is what Rivers is - a highly efficient quarterback who throws a lot of touchdown passes.  But periods of failure and success are built into the model.

 

I'm just saying, it's silly to suggest you can come up with an objective, empirical evaluation of a football player - there are simply too many of them, too many games.  If you want to say Rivers is a sub-elite quarterback, it's because of just that: it's what you want to say, rather than it being objective reality.

 

And I am officially retiring from the Philip Rivers fan club now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

buck's QB Football Objective:  WIN GAMES (preferably in the clutch)


 


deadfaulkner's QB Football Objective:  HIGH STATS AND FORMULAS (preferably AY/A)


 


Therefore, buck is right and so is deadfaulkner, because Rivers is a proven choker and a proven statistically above average QB.  


 


edit - what I am saying (and have been saying the whole time) is - I appreciate, understand and compile stats while trying to understand where they derive from, but I don't give a crap when a guy chokes as much as Rivers.  


Edited by buck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady is a proven choker as well. I've seen him choke year after year since 2006. He cant win the big one anymore.

So how did he go from clutch to not clutch. Because the concept of clutch or not-choking has a huge luck component and we are dealing with tiny small sample sizes.

If i have everyone in the world flip a penny 20 times. One guy will probably flip heads 20 times and another 0. Is the guy that flipped heads 20 times clutch at flipping heads...no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×