http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=321111026
Bruce Irvin does not look like a bust BTW. 2 sacks along with 2 QB hits. A blank on the stat sheet for Clemons though

hawksfan515 wrote:A blank on the stat sheet for Clemons though
NoChops wrote:qbr is lame, sando is the only one who quotes it, cuz he made up that stupid crap to try an be relevant. It is about as important as dvoa, and upthewazzu.
Fox0r wrote:NoChops wrote:qbr is lame, sando is the only one who quotes it, cuz he made up that stupid crap to try an be relevant. It is about as important as dvoa, and upthewazzu.
I thought Trent Dilfer made it up?
peachesenregalia wrote:Man, I knew it wouldn't be nearly as good as his passer rating, but 45.8 is a bit steep.
I'm still not sure how much I buy into the whole QBR thing. Just seems like it could be too subjective.
hawksfan515 wrote:His first half QBR must have been horrible. I kinda agree with this though, that fumble return TD and his other fumble....... He might as well have tossed INT's.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=321111026
Bruce Irvin does not look like a bust BTW. 2 sacks along with 2 QB hits. A blank on the stat sheet for Clemons though
Basis4day wrote:hawksfan515 wrote:His first half QBR must have been horrible. I kinda agree with this though, that fumble return TD and his other fumble....... He might as well have tossed INT's.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=321111026
Bruce Irvin does not look like a bust BTW. 2 sacks along with 2 QB hits. A blank on the stat sheet for Clemons though
Bruce gets 2 sacks and you still want to complain about Clem?
NoChops wrote:qbr is lame, sando is the only one who quotes it, cuz he made up that stupid crap to try an be relevant. It is about as important as dvoa, and upthewazzu.
kearly wrote:I'd prefer to use stats that are explainable. Passer rating may be arbitrary and flawed, but at least we know how it's calculated. ANYA is a great stat- it's simple to calculate and bases it's formula off of studies that determined the actual value of an interception. I see any stat that we can't calculate ourselves as being a "mystery stat."
Football outsiders and Advanced NFL stats have a lot of mystery stats, but at least they pass the eyeball test. Seattle's high scores on DVOA and individual scores for DYAR make sense, there are no results that feel wildly at odds with reality. Same thing with Advanced NFL stats individual metrics like success rate.
But QBR almost never seems to pass the eyeball test. If you watched this game, you knew that Wilson played very well. He bought time, he made perfect throws when he had to, and he was smart with the football- most of his incompletions were throw-aways. His 133 passer rating was one of the highest of the week, but his QBR was under 50, saying that he had a below average game overall. QBR might take fumbles into consideration, but if it doesn't and still thinks that, then holy crap what a worthless stat.
Just as bad is Luck's 93.7 QBR, meaning a 93.7th percentile performance, on Thursday. His line? 18/26, 227 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT, 80.1 rating. It's a high YPA performance and probably under-rated by his QB rating, but there is just no way that he had a 94th percentile performance. If Indy was 75% on 3rd downs or something that might explain things, but they were 3/11, which is below average. Really, I can't figure it out, and it makes me think their system is too flawed to take seriously.
In fairness, FO pretty much agrees with QBR with Luck v. Wilson. Luck has a big lead in DYAR and a slim lead in DVOA. The lead in DYAR makes sense- since DYAR is a counting stat- more reps = more opportunity for DYAR. The DVOA number does surprise me though. Wilson only rates +1.2%, meaning that they see him as almost dead average. That's pretty close to QBR which has him at 56.9/100 for the season, with 50 being average.
It should be noted though that play tracking is very much a subjective science. With QBR they have to make decisions about who gets the blame for a drop and also awards extra points for an undefined "clutch factor." It's not hard at all to see bias coming into play with those numbers.
SharkHawk wrote:Didn't Clem cause the fumble, or was that Irvin?
jlwaters1 wrote:SharkHawk wrote:Didn't Clem cause the fumble, or was that Irvin?
It was Sherman who caused the fumble that was recovered by Jones IIRC. Sherman should be nominated for Defensive player of the week- if there is such an award. An INT and Sack for a CB is pretty awesome.
Sarlacc83 wrote:Wilson's QBR rating is a load of junk and we all know it.
Steve2222 wrote:Sherman had 3 PDs, 1 INT, 1 Sack, and 1 FF......yeah he deserves DPOW.
DohBoy wrote:If I want to read depressing, pseudo-metrics which indicate my team sucks, I'll just go over to USSMariner.com. Their (and others) overly-anal analysis of statistics in baseball has sort of rendered Mariner baseball boring, namely because the non-playing know-it-all's already know it all.
I pray the asexual, dweebish types that eschew their families for data compilation and analysis don't do to football what they did to baseball. Let's just play the damn game and enjoy the twists & turns. It's entertainment for Christ's sake, not a refresher of non-parametric statistics. The rest of my life already follows a script, I really don't need the season's outcome of my Seahawk football to be determined in August by guys who are hellbent on using things like QBR & QPR to ruin the excitement.
DohBoy
hawksfan515 wrote:Steve2222 wrote:Sherman had 3 PDs, 1 INT, 1 Sack, and 1 FF......yeah he deserves DPOW.
And first team all-pro, along with Browner
But seriously I'm gonna be really pissed if one of Chicago's CB's steals first team all-pro away from Sherman.
hawksfan515 wrote:His first half QBR must have been horrible. I kinda agree with this though, that fumble return TD and his other fumble....... He might as well have tossed INT's.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=321111026
Bruce Irvin does not look like a bust BTW. 2 sacks along with 2 QB hits. A blank on the stat sheet for Clemons though
hawksfan515 wrote:.......But seriously I'm gonna be really pissed if one of Chicago's CB's steals first team all-pro away from Sherman.
DohBoy wrote:If I want to read depressing, pseudo-metrics which indicate my team sucks, I'll just go over to USSMariner.com. Their (and others) overly-anal analysis of statistics in baseball has sort of rendered Mariner baseball boring, namely because the non-playing know-it-all's already know it all.
I pray the asexual, dweebish types that eschew their families for data compilation and analysis don't do to football what they did to baseball. Let's just play the damn game and enjoy the twists & turns. It's entertainment for Christ's sake, not a refresher of non-parametric statistics. The rest of my life already follows a script, I really don't need the season's outcome of my Seahawk football to be determined in August by guys who are hellbent on using things like QBR & QPR to ruin the excitement.
DohBoy
It is currently Wed Apr 25, 2018 6:35 am
Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]