Sanchez is ranked #1 on a list of overpaid NFL players

[NYJets90]

I'm not really supporting Eli; I'm wondering why someone would defend Sanchez as "a winner, period" and then demand to know why a Super Bowl MVP wasn't included in the list.

[Aten]

Is Sanchez even one of the five most overpaid players in his draft class? He isn't a good quarterback but this is pretty stupid.

[Blackout]

For a guy who hates bad decisions and costly turnovers, are you sure supporting Eli Manning in this argument is a cross worth bearing?

Eli sure didn't have any costly turnovers in that superbowl

[NYJets90]

Eli sure didn't have any costly turnovers in that superbowl

because Asante Samuel couldn't catch a cold.

[RutgersJetFan]

Every single year you see a reporter or two take a shot at this and it never comes out right. There's no methodology used, and the fact that they go by yearly salaries only goes to reinforce the poor research and logic. There's a lot of context lost in this article. Sanchez's salary is that high this year, but he would have been ranked much lower last year when he cleared something like $7 mill. Bradford's contract is being paid out mostly through his bonus, which they don't even account for here, which also reflects poor research because teams finagle those bonuses to structure around the cap. Ditto for Stafford who gets much more in bonuses than Sanchez does. Bottom line is base salaries simply aren't the single means by which these guys get paid. That they're throwing in guys who've been tagged only adds to this, because teams have also historically used the tag as a means of holding on to a guy whom they don't want to give a long-term deal, but don't mind paying the extra cash to hold on to. This is just poorly written with poor logic, symptomatic of a slow day at the office.

This would, however, be an interesting topic to explore if someone calculated it out correctly. This just isn't that.

[Jetsfan80]

This would, however, be an interesting topic to explore if someone calculated it out correctly.

jason?

[RutgersJetFan]

Is Sanchez even one of the five most overpaid players in his draft class? He isn't a good quarterback but this is pretty stupid.

What did t!ts McGee get? $50 mill right?

[JetsFanInDenver]

Truth.

Nice pic.

I am sure the world would have hated her is she was a brunette!

[Jetsfan80]

Nice pic.

I am sure the world would have hated her is she was a brunette!

Brunettes just don't end up like that.

[RutgersJetFan]

jason?

I think everyone from the QBR thread would be solid. They seem to have a good grasp of numbers.

[jason423]

jason?

It would be too difficult to do because there are so many ways to value a contract (not to mention I dont have enough information on most deals to do more than an educated guess for certain players). The base salary idea that the author used is just terrible, but what do you base it on? Yearly cash payouts which are skewed by prorated bonuses? Average per year which is skewed by the fact that almost nobody sees the back end of a deal? Guarantees, most of which are not even real guarantees? 3 year averages are probably the best sum, but that completely excludes players on short term deals.

I had actually tried to do a price value type map to predict what salary a QB should receive when he got his extension (I just used APY to try it out) but I couldnt come up with a way to rate the QB. I tried to use a combination of QBR plus percent of team offense for all the 2010 starters (this way it would balance out the fact that certain players are far more important to the team because they are actually good rather than just being caretakers who receive a good QBR, DVOA, etc...) that played most of the season. The guys on the rookie deals skewed the projections way too much so I pulled them out, but still wasnt sure it worked that well, so it never saw the light of day.

Anyway just for kicks---the most bang for the buck was Matt Schaub with a 90 QBR and nearly 71% of his teams offense at $8M per year. Based on the market he should be around 12-12,5M. Drew Brees was also great value at 10M and should have been right around 14M. Of the low end starters Ryan Fitzpatrick was the most valuable (81.8, 60.9%) proving to be the most effective caretaker type. He should probably make around 5M or so rather than 2.6M

The worst in the league is Vick, but I didnt take into account running which would probably put him closer to the average. Eli was the most overvalued, making around 16.1M a year with an 85.3 QBR and 65.8% of the offensive yards. He should be paid between 9 and 10.5M a year based on the market and his production. David Garrard was really the only overvalued low level guy. He is the poster boy for the high efficient but no real talent player. He had a QBR of 90.9 but only accounted for about 50% of the offense (his DVOA was far more realistic at 4.8%, but he should not have any positive rating for anything). He was at 9.6M/year and should have been between 7 and 8.

Sanchez, using this criteria, should only receive 5.7-6M per year. He makes 10.05M. Of the 26 QBs I rated the only two less productive were Alex Smith and Jason Campbell, neither of whom was close to playing 16 games (obviously injured guys like Romo and Stafford were less productive and not even included). Average salary for a QB was $10.23 million per year. Average QBR was an 89. Average % of team offense was 63.9%. Sanchez was a 75.3 and 58.6%.

[JiFtheOracle]

It would be too difficult to do because there are so many ways to value a contract (not to mention I dont have enough information on most deals to do more than an educated guess for certain players). The base salary idea that the author used is just terrible, but what do you base it on? Yearly cash payouts which are skewed by prorated bonuses? Average per year which is skewed by the fact that almost nobody sees the back end of a deal? Guarantees, most of which are not even real guarantees? 3 year averages are probably the best sum, but that completely excludes players on short term deals.

I had actually tried to do a price value type map to predict what salary a QB should receive when he got his extension (I just used APY to try it out) but I couldnt come up with a way to rate the QB. I tried to use a combination of QBR plus percent of team offense for all the 2010 starters (this way it would balance out the fact that certain players are far more important to the team because they are actually good rather than just being caretakers who receive a good QBR, DVOA, etc...) that played most of the season. The guys on the rookie deals skewed the projections way too much so I pulled them out, but still wasnt sure it worked that well, so it never saw the light of day.

Anyway just for kicks---the most bang for the buck was Matt Schaub with a 90 QBR and nearly 71% of his teams offense at $8M per year. Based on the market he should be around 12-12,5M. Drew Brees was also great value at 10M and should have been right around 14M. Of the low end starters Ryan Fitzpatrick was the most valuable (81.8, 60.9%) proving to be the most effective caretaker type. He should probably make around 5M or so rather than 2.6M

The worst in the league is Vick, but I didnt take into account running which would probably put him closer to the average. Eli was the most overvalued, making around 16.1M a year with an 85.3 QBR and 65.8% of the offensive yards. He should be paid between 9 and 10.5M a year based on the market and his production. David Garrard was really the only overvalued low level guy. He is the poster boy for the high efficient but no real talent player. He had a QBR of 90.9 but only accounted for about 50% of the offense (his DVOA was far more realistic at 4.8%, but he should not have any positive rating for anything). He was at 9.6M/year and should have been between 7 and 8.

Sanchez, using this criteria, should only receive 5.7-6M per year. He makes 10.05M. Of the 26 QBs I rated the only two less productive were Alex Smith and Jason Campbell, neither of whom was close to playing 16 games (obviously injured guys like Romo and Stafford were less productive and not even included). Average salary for a QB was $10.23 million per year. Average QBR was an 89. Average % of team offense was 63.9%. Sanchez was a 75.3 and 58.6%.

That is impressive work and it would be interesting to see contracts work like that but there are just so many variables that factor in that have nothing to do with production.

[aec4]

yep, QB who took his team to AFC Champ game twice is overpaid.

YET, the QB who's only claim to fame is leading a team to a 11-5 record in NE with an all-star cast, making 1 playoff in 2 years as a starter, and getting walloped in that game looking like a fool is not even though he makes 5M more.

[jason423]

That is impressive work and it would be interesting to see contracts work like that but there are just so many variables that factor in that have nothing to do with production.

Yeah its pretty tough to do. I do think some positions are more stat based (WR, RB and DE for example), but even those take in a large amount of stats so its hard to just put a number on a player like a Madden rating as anything legit. I do believe that most teams try to find a few comparable players based on some set of stats plus their own internal opinions on a guy and use those contracts as the max/min ranges for deals. But you can never quantitatively factor in things like draft status/invested time, coach/organization relationship, short term need for the player, outside the organization perception, and Al Davis getting involved. There is almost no reason besides those types of factors that can explain how Bart Scott and David Harris make so much money on the Jets because statistically there are a ton of linebackers much more productive. The same thing will likely happen with Sanchez in few years. The Jets invested a ton of time in him, they like him, and he is a star in NY. How much is that worth? Probably at least a few million a year over what he should be making, but there is no way to project that.

[jason423]

yep, QB who took his team to AFC Champ game twice is overpaid.

YET, the QB who's only claim to fame is leading a team to a 11-5 record in NE with an all-star cast, making 1 playoff in 2 years as a starter, and getting walloped in that game looking like a fool is not even though he makes 5M more.

Cassel? He doesnt make 5M more. He makes a few million less than Sanchez this year. His deal is for just under 10M per year which is probably a pretty fair value these days for an average/slightly below average QB. The problem for Sanchez is that Rex is such a defensive coach and everything is so about defense that people look at Sanchez as the reason the Jets dont win. He didn't have his 2001 and 2003 Tom Brady Super Bowl moments. Not to say Sanchez didnt play well in the playoffs because he was as good as you could be without being a Manning-level player, but the Jets dominated the Bengals, Chargers, and Patriots. He did have his drive against the Colts but it was a wildcard game and people remember the Cromartie runback as much as the Sanchez throws.

I dont think its really fair to blame Sanchez. If the Jets still had Favre they would have won the Super Bowl in 2009, but in 2010 they were going to go just as far whether it was Sanchez in that game or some other vet not named Manning, Rivers, Brees, or Manning. But the perception is that Sanchez has held the team back.

[T0mShane]

It would be too difficult to do because there are so many ways to value a contract (not to mention I dont have enough information on most deals to do more than an educated guess for certain players). The base salary idea that the author used is just terrible, but what do you base it on? Yearly cash payouts which are skewed by prorated bonuses? Average per year which is skewed by the fact that almost nobody sees the back end of a deal? Guarantees, most of which are not even real guarantees? 3 year averages are probably the best sum, but that completely excludes players on short term deals.

I had actually tried to do a price value type map to predict what salary a QB should receive when he got his extension (I just used APY to try it out) but I couldnt come up with a way to rate the QB. I tried to use a combination of QBR plus percent of team offense for all the 2010 starters (this way it would balance out the fact that certain players are far more important to the team because they are actually good rather than just being caretakers who receive a good QBR, DVOA, etc...) that played most of the season. The guys on the rookie deals skewed the projections way too much so I pulled them out, but still wasnt sure it worked that well, so it never saw the light of day.

Anyway just for kicks---the most bang for the buck was Matt Schaub with a 90 QBR and nearly 71% of his teams offense at $8M per year. Based on the market he should be around 12-12,5M. Drew Brees was also great value at 10M and should have been right around 14M. Of the low end starters Ryan Fitzpatrick was the most valuable (81.8, 60.9%) proving to be the most effective caretaker type. He should probably make around 5M or so rather than 2.6M

The worst in the league is Vick, but I didnt take into account running which would probably put him closer to the average. Eli was the most overvalued, making around 16.1M a year with an 85.3 QBR and 65.8% of the offensive yards. He should be paid between 9 and 10.5M a year based on the market and his production. David Garrard was really the only overvalued low level guy. He is the poster boy for the high efficient but no real talent player. He had a QBR of 90.9 but only accounted for about 50% of the offense (his DVOA was far more realistic at 4.8%, but he should not have any positive rating for anything). He was at 9.6M/year and should have been between 7 and 8.

Sanchez, using this criteria, should only receive 5.7-6M per year. He makes 10.05M. Of the 26 QBs I rated the only two less productive were Alex Smith and Jason Campbell, neither of whom was close to playing 16 games (obviously injured guys like Romo and Stafford were less productive and not even included). Average salary for a QB was $10.23 million per year. Average QBR was an 89. Average % of team offense was 63.9%. Sanchez was a 75.3 and 58.6%.

Holy.

[bitonti]

Sanchez, using this criteria, should only receive 5.7-6M per year. He makes 10.05M. Of the 26 QBs I rated the only two less productive were Alex Smith and Jason Campbell, neither of whom was close to playing 16 games (obviously injured guys like Romo and Stafford were less productive and not even included). Average salary for a QB was $10.23 million per year. Average QBR was an 89. Average % of team offense was 63.9%. Sanchez was a 75.3 and 58.6%.

jason did you consider his 4 road playoff wins in this formula?

or how much attention the NFL has paid to it's most high profile Latino player?

the Jets are on tv every week and I think Sanchez is part of that

[CTM]

That is impressive work and it would be interesting to see contracts work like that but there are just so many variables that factor in that have nothing to do with production.

like marketability and twink shots in GQ?

[RutgersJetFan]

It would be too difficult to do because there are so many ways to value a contract (not to mention I dont have enough information on most deals to do more than an educated guess for certain players). The base salary idea that the author used is just terrible, but what do you base it on? Yearly cash payouts which are skewed by prorated bonuses? Average per year which is skewed by the fact that almost nobody sees the back end of a deal? Guarantees, most of which are not even real guarantees? 3 year averages are probably the best sum, but that completely excludes players on short term deals.

I had actually tried to do a price value type map to predict what salary a QB should receive when he got his extension (I just used APY to try it out) but I couldnt come up with a way to rate the QB. I tried to use a combination of QBR plus percent of team offense for all the 2010 starters (this way it would balance out the fact that certain players are far more important to the team because they are actually good rather than just being caretakers who receive a good QBR, DVOA, etc...) that played most of the season. The guys on the rookie deals skewed the projections way too much so I pulled them out, but still wasnt sure it worked that well, so it never saw the light of day.

I've always thought you could combine PFF's numbers and FO's in some sort. Perhaps not incorporating them identically but certainly scoring them accordingly to their charts. Rookie salaries could be adjusted for if the methodology provided for it. Bottom line is you'd have to utilize a statistical source that incorporates, quantitatively, an equal look at what offensive linemen do and the Bart Scotts/BJ Rajis of the league. The good thing about using those numbers, FO's particularly, is that they're already adjusted as well.

[The Crusher]

like marketability and twink shots in GQ?

Truth is that was probably a pretty big factor in Woody's eyes. Needed a face of this franchise and went out and got the most marketable to come out in awhile. Has their ever been a prettier more marketable QB? Personally knowing that Giselle makes more than Brady I almost feel Sanchez is underpaid. Suermodels make more than NFL QB's period. PAY THE MAN

[JiFtheOracle]

like marketability and twink shots in GQ?

Definitely...and the market period. A guy in New York is going to make more than a guy in Jacksonville, you'd figure.

[Kleckineau]

Why has the bar been set so low for this kid?

The overwhelming majority of football fans would consider losing 2 championship games in a row as a failure yet here at JN Sanchez fans count it as a great accomplishment.

[jason423]

jason did you consider his 4 road playoff wins in this formula?

or how much attention the NFL has paid to it's most high profile Latino player?

the Jets are on tv every week and I think Sanchez is part of that

No. It wasnt really a formula, just something I tinkered with when I had some free time and wasn't crazy about the results so I never followed up with it. I just thought it would add something to the discussion here which is why I brought it up. There is no way to quantify the kind of things you are talking about but it clearly plays a role. Even if we took my thing as realistic, Sanchez is going to make extra money based on the fact that he is a media magnet, is a "clutch" performer, was drafted early in the first round, etc...

Eli Manning ended up making what he made because it was NY, he was a former number 1 overall pick, and he peaked at the perfect time. Now I think Manning has been better than most people give him credit for and the post SB Manning is much better than the pre SB Manning, but eventually all those outside the stat ways of looking at a guy do come back to potentially bite you which is what is happening now with Eli, provided the team cant escape the deal. 2007 was an eternity ago and the Giants have not made the playoffs since 2008. Eli is getting booed again and a big reason is that contract which is way overvalued based on his actual production. Its not that much different than the Pennington contract that the Jets gave Chad based strictly on his 2002 season and the fact that the organization thought they finally found the face of a NY franchise. By 2005 people were booing Chad for even gutting out a return to a football game with his shoulder dangling by a thread because the team had no other QB option.

[jason423]

I've always thought you could combine PFF's numbers and FO's in some sort. Perhaps not incorporating them identically but certainly scoring them accordingly to their charts. Rookie salaries could be adjusted for if the methodology provided for it. Bottom line is you'd have to utilize a statistical source that incorporates, quantitatively, an equal look at what offensive linemen do and the Bart Scotts/BJ Rajis of the league. The good thing about using those numbers, FO's particularly, is that they're already adjusted as well.

Its one of those things that would make for an interesting look. I actually preferred the PFF grades and was initially going to use them to look at players vs their salaries but didnt feel like paying for access and didnt want to ask for free trial access or anything like that. One of the big issues with the NFL moreso than the other sports is the stats have to pass an "eye test", and many times the FO numbers do not. You cant rate Brandon Jacobs the 7th best back in the NFL and BenJarvus Green-Ellis the number 2 back in the NFL and expect to use it for anything good. Teams are not using those metrics to look at players and it would be at least 1 whole generation of scouts and front office turnover before they did.

I think a player like Scott you can just never rate. I think last year he made less than 8% of the team tackles on his own and was involved in about 13% of the team tackles (Harris was at only 9% and 10%). Of the bigger name guys that rated him far below average as a solo guy, but top 5 in terms total involvement, but it doesnt take into account the fact that he isn't supposed to be involved much of the time with the tackle. He is often clearing space for someone else to make the tackle closer to the line than they normally would. Willis ranked first in both categories by a mile, but in some ways Scott makes just as much of a positive contribution while Willis is just cleaning up a mess left by the rest of his teammates.

[Larz]

have the lions gotten their money's worth from stafford ? the kids got a boatload of talent but he's played in a fraction of the games he's been paid for (17 out of 34)

and is this just QB's or can we look at other guys ?

[gsnts725]

sigh these types of articles are annoying

[Aten]

Its one of those things that would make for an interesting look. I actually preferred the PFF grades and was initially going to use them to look at players vs their salaries but didnt feel like paying for access and didnt want to ask for free trial access or anything like that. One of the big issues with the NFL moreso than the other sports is the stats have to pass an "eye test", and many times the FO numbers do not. You cant rate Brandon Jacobs the 7th best back in the NFL and BenJarvus Green-Ellis the number 2 back in the NFL and expect to use it for anything good. Teams are not using those metrics to look at players and it would be at least 1 whole generation of scouts and front office turnover before they did.

Can you please show me anything where anyone or any stat from FO says that Brandon Jacobs is the 7th-best back in the NFL or that Green-Ellis is 2nd? You know perfectly well that they don't. Your argument is disingenuous and stupid on purpose. Everybody understands that the fact that Stafford has the most touchdown passes doesn't mean that he's the best quarterback, so why is it so difficult to understand that the fact that a guy has the seventh-highest DVOA doesn't purport to qualitatively rank him as the seventh-best in the league?

[Aten]

Can you please show me anything where anyone or any stat from FO says that Brandon Jacobs is the 7th-best back in the NFL or that Green-Ellis is 2nd? You know perfectly well that they don't. Your argument is disingenuous and stupid on purpose. Everybody understands that the fact that Stafford has the most touchdown passes doesn't mean that he's the best quarterback, so why is it so difficult to understand that the fact that a guy has the seventh-highest DVOA doesn't purport to qualitatively rank him as the seventh-best in the league?

Also, you're right that teams don't use these numbers. They use way better numbers that would make you guys even louder and angrier than DVOA does.

[Jet27]

I could care less about stats...the only thing that matters is that our Jets have more wins than the freakin Pats and every other team in the AFC. I could care less how much the kid is making as long as we get to the playoffs every year with a shot at being in and potentially winning the SB. The only stat that matters is how many playoff appearances, and how many super bowls have been won.

[jason423]

Can you please show me anything where anyone or any stat from FO says that Brandon Jacobs is the 7th-best back in the NFL or that Green-Ellis is 2nd? You know perfectly well that they don't. Your argument is disingenuous and stupid on purpose. Everybody understands that the fact that Stafford has the most touchdown passes doesn't mean that he's the best quarterback, so why is it so difficult to understand that the fact that a guy has the seventh-highest DVOA doesn't purport to qualitatively rank him as the seventh-best in the league?

Im talking about taking a stat to plot on a chart versus a players salary as an indication of where his value should lie based on the performance and the total salaries in the NFL. How in the world can you do that using a FO metric where Jacobs is going to rank higher than Chris Johnson,even if it doesnt mean they are saying he is the better player? You cant. FO is great for team based analysis. I dont think you can really use it as a gauge for players for what I was looking to do. Its more of a tool for saying "hey maybe this guy should get more or less touches or maybe a team should consider Jacobs for a situational role when he hits free agency".

PFF hits closer for how teams I believe certain teams grade individual players for decisions on future moves, basically +- 1,2,3 or a 0 grade for each play. As far as know PFF doesnt adjust those numbers for SOS which they should do to help translate them into something like negative/positive yards allowed per player.

[RutgersJetFan]

Im talking about taking a stat to plot on a chart versus a players salary as an indication of where his value should lie based on the performance and the total salaries in the NFL. How in the world can you do that using a FO metric where Jacobs is going to rank higher than Chris Johnson,even if it doesnt mean they are saying he is the better player? You cant. FO is great for team based analysis. I dont think you can really use it as a gauge for players for what I was looking to do. Its more of a tool for saying "hey maybe this guy should get more or less touches or maybe a team should consider Jacobs for a situational role when he hits free agency".

PFF hits closer for how teams I believe certain teams grade individual players for decisions on future moves, basically +- 1,2,3 or a 0 grade for each play. As far as know PFF doesnt adjust those numbers for SOS which they should do to help translate them into something like negative/positive yards allowed per player.

Right, that was my one of my original points though. Jointly distributing them would account for the adjustment.

[THE ILK]

Obviously they did not consider his baging 16 year olds abilities.

Or did they?

[Larz]

do wins count or just yards ? merch sales ? primetime games ? sanchez' value goes beyond completions.

[Aten]

PFF hits closer for how teams I believe certain teams grade individual players for decisions on future moves, basically +- 1,2,3 or a 0 grade for each play. As far as know PFF doesnt adjust those numbers for SOS which they should do to help translate them into something like negative/positive yards allowed per player.

The problem with this is the fact that PFF calls its grades numbers doesn't mean they're actually quantitative measures. Trying to apply a quantitative adjustment to nonquantitative data is like shooting a musket at a moving target. My guess is they tried, wound up with so much noise that the grade coefficient was statistically insignificant, then scrapped it and just went back to counting things. Which as you point out really isn't the worst approach in the world.