Jump to content

Top 10 QBs of 2012-13 based on AV


Recommended Posts

I'm starting work on ratings for a vanilla rom where most of the ratings will be based on the Approximate Value given to each player by pro-football-reference.com. The ratings are modeled directly on the original rom, with some players being exact copies. For example, RG-III is QB Eagles with 50ms instead of 56, Matt Ryan is an exact copy of QB Bills, etc. The AV listed is the total of all QBs for each team. So for example Kaepernick was rated as if he had an AV of 16.


 


AV - Name - TEAM - RS/RP/MS/HP - PS/PC/PA/APB


 


20 - Robert Griffin III - WAS - 25/69/50/13 - 63/69/63/63


18 - Matt Ryan - ATL - 25/69/13/13 - 56/81/81/81


18 - Tom Brady - NE - 25/69/13/13 - 56/81/81/75


17 - Aaron Rodgers - GB - 25/69/19/13 - 63/75/75/63


16 - Colin Kaepernick - SF - 25/69/31/13 - 56/63/63/63


16 - Russell Wilson - SEA - 25/69/31/13 - 44/69/50/44


16 - Cam Newton - CAR - 25/69/44/13 - 69/31/44/63


15 - Peyton Manning - DEN - 25/69/13/13 - 56/63/69/75


15 - Eli Manning - NYG - 25/69/13/13 - 56/63/56/56


15 - Drew Brees - NO - 25/69/6/13 - 69/63/50/44


 


Since he won the Super Bowl, here's Joe Flacco, with an AV of 14:


 


14 - Joe Flacco - BAL - 25/69/6/13 - 69/56/63/81


Edited by BO FB Offtackle Left
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious as to whether you will take natural playing ability and have any subjectivity in your ratings.


 


 


For example,


 


Arm Strength- Most NFL scouts and Analysts agree that Aaron Rodgers and Joe Flacco have the best arm talent in the league. Do you account for that in any way in the ratings


 


 


Colin Kaepernick- He has great arm talent as well be struggles with anticipation. His accuracy is inconsistent as well.


 


Adjusted Value  (in general)- AV is an overall measurement, not just a measurement of passing skills. RG III, Kaepernick, Cam Newton, and Russell Wilson all have higher AVs due to rushing statistics. How do you seperate that out?


Edited by keirre21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wack!


 


drew brees: 5100 yards, 43 TD, 19 Int, 63%


 


and you have him with a freaking 56/63/50 !!??


 


meanwhile, eli with 3900 yards, 26 TD, 15 Int, 60% gets even better ratings than this?


 


 


time to look at actual stats and RE-EVALUATE the Formulas!


 


 


*How about giving Brees a 69 PS?


Edited by buck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all pretty subjective, honestly. For PS, Bleacher Report had an article ranking the arm strength of every starter. I started with that as a basis, read the comments, added in my own judgement. They ranked Rodgers #1 but every comment said bullshit, Cutler is stronger. Also I wanted Rodgers to have higher PC so making his PS too high would give him just a little too much talent. I also think Cutler has a better arm than Rodgers. 


 


I made Kaepernick RG-III lite: 56/63 instead of 63/69.


 


I rated MS first based mostly on rushing yards. Then I did PS. Then PC just mostly fell into place based on the Approximate Value.


 


For example, WAS has the top AV at the QB position, 20, which is 2 points higher than the next team at 18. That's strong enough to make RGIII a QB Eagles clone so I gave him QB Eagles ratings. Then you have Ryan and Brady - easy, they're Montana and QB Bills. Then Rodgers is modeled after Moon. And so on. 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buck, that's actually a nice catch. They were originally closer but then I had to lower Brees MS. I usually raise one stat when I lower another if I want the player to be about the same level but just a little different. I'll change that.


 


Also, I used the formula MS+PC+PS/2 as a rough guide, so once I had PS and MS the PC could only be one or two things.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buck, also the way AV works is it is spread around the team based on things like games won and other factors. Since the Giants were 9-7 and the Saints were 7-9 the Giants would have more points to spread around. In other words, if the teams had the exact same stats they did now but both were 8-8, Brees would probably have a point or two higher AV.


 


It's an experiment to see if the teams come out like they should. Individual players may be slightly off, but I believe necessarily so to reflect the team overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, I think half of those came out rated pretty solid.  so you have a very good starting point.  but Brees's numbers can't be ignored, despite the team being complete shit this year (defense).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can be ignored because you have to consider how those stats might have been earned. If you're losing 9 games that means you are down and you have to pass a shit ton to try to get back in the game. The defense will be softer. I believe the formula they use for AV considers all of these things. 3000 quality yards could be worth just as much as 5000 "mad bomber" yards. I'm pretty sure they rate stats gained in the fourth quarter when there is a big lead differently than when it is a game-winning drive, and all kinds of other things like that. If you go read the article about it on the site it's really pretty involved. That's why I'm trying it, I'm pretty sure it will work well.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good stuff.  I agree with most of these.


 


Brees is tough to rate.  My initial thought was he should be a notch or two higher.  His INT % was horrible this year (like bottom 15 in the league) but he's still a top QB in my book...and NO's Def should probably be the worst D in the game.  I think he should be better.


 


Cam seems high.  I have no statistical evidence to support that...and I'm not a Cam fan, but I don't consider him a Top 10, or even 15 QB.  I guess his scrambling ability makes him a Tecmo Stud, though.


 


Nice job with Flacco at 14.  Merrill Hoge seems to disagree.


http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/65407/hoge-flacco-is-nfls-no-1-quarterback

Link to comment
Share on other sites

brees is not hard to rate.


 


look at QB Chris Everett (rated the same as BO proposes for Brees here), 1990 LA Rams 5-11 record:  55%, 4000 yds, 23 TD 17 INT.  PLUS he has Ellard and Anderson and a 50 MS RB...


 


WTF.  unless you're giving NO a 56 MS RB, and Ellard + Anderson + Keith Jackson, I can't see how this is even a question.


 


I know you're using that "AV" bullshit.  But dude, we're talking Drew Brees here,  a proven All-Star.


Edited by buck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like I shafted him. 63/63 is pretty damn high. He was modeled on Everett as buck says, which isn't too shabby. Also, depending on how the rest of the team comes out, I may have to revisit these ratings.


 


Cam was a pain, I honestly have no idea who he is. Like I said, I did MS first based on yards and sacks, and he is right below RG-III there. Then I read he had a strong arm, so the high PS/low PC model a la Schroeder presented itself. Yeah he has the insane 44ms and 69ps, but he has a 31pc to go along with that. 


 


For MS, It was basically:


 


56 for 1000 yds


50 for 800 yds


44 for 600 yds


38 for 500 yds


31 for 400 yds


25 for 300 yds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To illustrate this specific example better, here is what is happening. The Giants got 221 total points and the Saints got 202 points. Both Brees and Eli got 15. So Brees got 7.4% of his team's points, and Eli got 6.8% of his. If the Saints were as good as the Giants overall, Brees would have received 16 points, and I would have given him similar passing stats to Rodgers (still 6ms though). If the Giants had 202 points like the Saints, Eli would get 14.


 


I'm not saying Eli is as good as Brees, because even though I'm a Giants fan I'm not crazy. What I am saying is that this 2012 Saints team makes Brees look worse than he is, and the 2012 Giants probably made Eli look a little better, at least compared to the Saints. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, I just finished the starters. Please note that Jake Locker's 25ms is due to him being 1 of only 6 QBs who rushed for 100 yards more than they lost in sacks. The 25pc is meant to balance this out.


 


AV - Name - TEAM - RS/RP/MS/HP - PS/PC/PA/APB


 


9 - Sam Bradford - STL - 25/69/13/13 - 56/31/38/50


9 - Brandon Weeden - CLE - 25/69/13/13 - 56/31/44/44


9 - Jake Locker - TEN - 25/69/25/13 - 44/25/31/44


7 - Mark Sanchez - NYJ - 25/69/6/13 - 38/44/44/38


7 - Chad Henne - JAX - 25/69/13/13 - 50/31/38/44


2 - Matt Cassel - KC - 25/69/19/13 - 25/31/31/25


0 - Kevin Kolb - ARI - 25/69/13/13 - 38/31/31/31 


Edited by BO FB Offtackle Left
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wack!

 

drew brees: 5100 yards, 43 TD, 19 Int, 63%

 

and you have him with a freaking 56/63/50 !!??

 

meanwhile, eli with 3900 yards, 26 TD, 15 Int, 60% gets even better ratings than this?

 

 

time to look at actual stats and RE-EVALUATE the Formulas!

 

 

*How about giving Brees a 69 PS?

 

 

I agree, Brees is far, far better than Eli. To be honest I'd take him over both the Mannings IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay Brees fans, I boosted him up to 69ps. I think this is the best I can make him.

 

 

Thanks, Jay Schroeder, we wouldn't want Drew Brees to be better than you, even though Drew Brees is probably one of the best passing QBs of all time, and you are a piece of shit QB with Bo Jackson on your team.

Edited by buck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...