Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jetsfan80

Football Outsiders QBASE: The most effective predictive tool for QB's?

Recommended Posts

QBASE explained:  https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2015/introducing-qbase

To sum up what QBASE is, the most important factors that impact QBASE are the following:  1) College performance (comp %, adjusted YPA, passing efficiency), adjusted for opposition and teammates 2) College experience, adjusted for quality, and 3) Projected draft slot. 

The QBASE score is expressed using projected DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) for Years 3-5 of the QB's pro career.  A negative DYAR score indicates a QB that is expected to be a below average QB compared to a replacement level QB for years 3-5.

These are the QBASE scores from 1997-2016 (with some established busts from 2017 added in).  I have bolded the QB's where QBASE was accurate with its projection:

  1. Phillip Rivers (2317)
  2. Carson Palmer (2216)
  3. Donovan McNabb (1946)
  4. Russell Wilson (1561)
  5. Robert Griffin III (1519)
  6. Peyton Manning (1463)
  7. Marcus Mariota (1275)
  8. Jared Goff (1211)
  9. Byron Leftwich (1200)
  10. Ben Roethlisberger (1193)
  11. John Beck (1151)
  12. Matthew Stafford (1125)
  13. Andrew Luck (1076)
  14. Chad Pennington (1069)
  15. Christian Ponder (1061)
  16. Daunte Culpepper (1061)
  17. Cade McNown (972)
  18. Teddy Bridgewater (945)
  19. Jay Cutler (936)
  20. Brett Hundley (936)
  21. Danny Wuerffel (928)
  22. Matt Leinart (915)
  23. Eli Manning (892)
  24. Jason Campbell (891)
  25. Brian Brohm (853)
  26. Tim Tebow (849)
  27. Geno Smith (839)
  28. Kevil Kolb (830)
  29. Kellen Clemens (800)
  30. Jake Plummer (790)
  31. Cam Newton (781)
  32. Alex Smith (771)
  33. Drew Brees (737)
  34. Vince Young (690)
  35. Derek Carr (641)
  36. Sam Bradford (617)
  37. Colt McCoy (610)
  38. Andrew Walter (583)
  39. Jimmy Garopoolo (560)
  40. JaMarcus Russell (535)
  41. Johnny Manziel (486)
  42. Blake Bortles (471)
  43. Matt Schaub (437)
  44. David Greene (432)
  45. Tim Couch (428)
  46. Dak Prescott (421)
  47. Joshua Dobbs (419)
  48. Ryan Finley (398)
  49. Nick Foles (392)
  50. Jameis Winston (378)
  51. Charlie Frye (368)
  52. David Carr (365)
  53. Brandon Weeden (325)
  54. Davis Webb (286)
  55. Luke Falk (277)
  56. Carson Wentz (274)
  57. Kyle Lauletta (273)
  58. Brady Quinn (262)
  59. Drew Stanton (257)
  60. Joe Flacco (256)
  61. Quincy Carter (248)
  62. Chad Henne (220)
  63. Matt Barkley (208)
  64. Akili Smith (198)
  65. Shaun King (183)
  66. Joey Harrington (178)
  67. EJ Manuel (170)
  68. Ryan Mallett (168)
  69. Matt Ryan (158)
  70. Jimmy Clausen (153)
  71. Brock Huard (139)
  72. Andy Dalton (138)
  73. Paxton Lynch (106)
  74. Ryan Leaf (105)
  75. Jim Druckenmiller (54)
  76. Colin Kaepernick (22)
  77. Blain Gabbert (14)
  78. Brad Kaaya (6)
  79. Jake Locker (2)
  80. Deshone Kizer (-30)
  81. Chris Redman (-45)
  82. Rex Grossman (-82)
  83. Sean Mannion (-109)
  84. Dave Ragone (-114)
  85. Will Grier (-151)
  86. Pat White (-155)
  87. Brian Griese (-172)
  88. Mark Sanchez (-184)
  89. J.P. Losman (-192)
  90. Josh Freeman ( -194)
  91. Kyle Boller (-222)
  92. Brodie Croyle (-226)
  93. Patrick Ramsey (-234)
  94. Nathan Peterman (-245)
  95. Bryce Petty (-292)
  96. Connor Cook (-301)
  97. Chris Simms (-318)
  98. Marques Tuiasosopo (-348)
  99. Charlie Whitehurst (-358)
  100. Christian Hackenberg (-414)
  101. Garrett Grayson (-427)
  102. Michael Vick (-446)
  103. Mike Glennon (-486)
  104. Kevin O'Connell (-499)
  105. Charlie Batch (-530)
  106. Trent Edwards (-647)
  107. Ryan Tannehill (-683)
  108. Brock Osweiler (-791)
  109. Josh McCown (-1304)

 

For the 109 QB's above, FO was accurate in their assessment 55 times, a little over 50 %. 

Where QBASE is especially effective is picking out who will BUST.  For QB's on the above list with scores under 200 (45), QBASE nailed it 34 times (76 %). 

 

For more recent (2017-19) draft classes, for these QB's we don't quite have enough data yet, but can already see the likely hits and misses:

  1. Baker Mayfield (1480)
  2. Pat Mahomes (656)
  3. Lamar Jackson (656)
  4. Josh Rosen (623)
  5. Kyler Murray (595)
  6. Dwayne Haskins (527)
  7. Mitchell Trubisky (435)
  8. Sam Darnold (412)
  9. Mason Rudolph (343)
  10. Drew Lock (271)
  11. Daniel Jones (263)
  12. Deshaun Watson (261)
  13. Jarrett Stidham (-45)
  14. Josh Allen (-83)

FO readily admitted they put too much stock in Deshaun Watson's elite teammates at Clemson, which explains his far too low score.  FO putting Mahomes and Jackson in the top 3 of 2017-19 prospects is of course a good call, but even then they will end up way low on those projections.  

 

Is QBASE a perfect tool?  Absolutely not.  And FO continues to tweak their efforts to project the most difficult position in all of pro sports to predict.  

But to be correct about 50 % of the time overall, and about 75 % right when it comes to figuring out who a bust will be, that's pretty impressive.  There is no scout or front office that is capable of getting it right at that rate.  Not even close.

Need more convincing?  QBASE would have steered us away from Mark Sanchez (-184), Bryce Petty (-292) and Christian Hackenberg (-414), and absolutely pushed the Jets to draft Russell Wilson (1561) in 2012.  It also would have told us Pat Mahomes (656) would be the best QB in the 2017 class, and worth taking at 6th overall.  It also would have also told the Jets to draft Lamar Jackson (656) over Sam Darnold (412) in 2018.

Would QBASE have still stuck us with Chad Pennington (1069)?  Yes.  But I think that would have all been worth it to, perhaps, have ended up with Russell Wilson or Pat Mahomes.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

FO readily admitted they put too much stock in Deshaun Watson's teammates in Clemson, which explains his far too low score. 

Some here already doing same with Lawrence. The supporting cast argument is truly weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty shocking tbh.

Although nice of you to admit that Pennington is top 15 all time. Legend.

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jgb said:

Some here already doing same with Lawrence. The supporting cast argument is truly weak.

Yep.  That miss caused FO to revisit their formula a bit.  I'm not sure exactly how they calculate it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2020 QBASE, btw:

  1. Joe Burrow (759)
  2. Justin Herbert (689)
  3. Tua Tagovailoa (654)
  4. Jake Fromm (439)
  5. Jalen Hurts (410)
  6. Jordan Love (57)
  7. Jacob Eason (-98)
  8. Anthony Gordon (-234)

QBASE gave Burrow and Herbert higher scores than Mahomes and Jackson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Yep.  That miss caused FO to revisit their formula a bit.  I'm not sure exactly how they calculate it now.

Yeah I mean it means something but people put waaaaaay too much emphasis on it. Both upside and downside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Michael Vick was a huge miss. Not sure why he’s bolded.

In his prime he was elite. Made 4 pro-bowls. Certainly outperformed his Hackenberg territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

Also Michael Vick was a huge miss. Not sure why he’s bolded.

In his prime he was elite. Made 4 pro-bowls. Certainly outperformed his Hackenberg territory.

It only looks at passing. They accurately predicted his passing stats in years 3-5. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

Also Michael Vick was a huge miss. Not sure why he’s bolded.

In his prime he was elite. Made 4 pro-bowls. Certainly outperformed his Hackenberg territory.

His Year 3-5 DYAR, which QBASE is intended to predict, was very accurate.  He was not a good QB.  Just an incredible runner.  QBASE only looks at how a QB does as a passer, which is appropriate.

Just go back and look at his numbers.  He had 1 good season as a passer, and it was much later in his career, on his 2nd team.  The most TD passes he ever had in a season was 21, and he paired that with 5 seasons with 10+ INTs.  He only went over 60 % completions once.  His career Yards per Attempt was a paltry 7.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

2020 QBASE, btw:

  1. Joe Burrow (759)
  2. Justin Herbert (689)
  3. Tua Tagovailoa (654)
  4. Jake Fromm (439)
  5. Jalen Hurts (410)
  6. Jordan Love (57)
  7. Jacob Eason (-98)
  8. Anthony Gordon (-234)

QBASE gave Burrow and Herbert higher scores than Mahomes and Jackson.

I assume there's no QBASE for Trevor Lawrence yet?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jetsfan80 you didn't bold McNabb?  He wasn't good enough for you?  Seems odd.  Especially when you consider he went after Couch.  The disparity there should be a plus for QBase.  The fact that they tweak the formula to fit results is good and bad.  It's good that they correct mistakes, but it kind of makes it a moving target to review.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

2020 QBASE, btw:

  1. Joe Burrow (759)
  2. Justin Herbert (689)
  3. Tua Tagovailoa (654)
  4. Jake Fromm (439)
  5. Jalen Hurts (410)
  6. Jordan Love (57)
  7. Jacob Eason (-98)
  8. Anthony Gordon (-234)

QBASE gave Burrow and Herbert higher scores than Mahomes and Jackson.

Where is James Morgan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dinamite said:

Where is James Morgan?

He didn't receive a grade, unfortunately.  They only grade QB's they believe are expected to be taken in the top 100 picks or so.  Where QB's are expected to go impacts their formula.  Because the idea is to project what a potential STARTING QB will be doing in Years 3-5. 

If James Morgan was expected by FO to be a QB2, then it makes no sense to try to project his performance.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

@Jetsfan80 you didn't bold McNabb?  He wasn't good enough for you?  Seems odd.  Especially when you consider he went after Couch.  The disparity there should be a plus for QBase.  The fact that they tweak the formula to fit results is good and bad.  It's good that they correct mistakes, but it kind of makes it a moving target to review.

He was a hit as a prospect, but they were sizably off in their projection.  They had him at 1946 DYAR in years 3-5.  He ended up at about 1000.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

He was a hit as a prospect, but they were sizably off in their projection.  They had him at 1946 DYAR in years 3-5.  He ended up at about 1000.  

Ah.  What are Darnold, Mayfield and Allen at now? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

Ah.  What are Darnold, Mayfield and Allen at now? 

Both are only entering Year 3 of their careers this season, so that's not available yet in terms of compare how close QBASE was.

I can give you their DYAR thru 2 years (+ 1 start in Year 3) but it wouldn't be meaningful for QBASE.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Ah.  What are Darnold, Mayfield and Allen at now? 

 

9 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Both are only entering Year 3 of their careers this season, so that's not available yet in terms of compare how close QBASE was.

I can give you their DYAR thru 2 years (+ 1 start in Year 3) but it wouldn't be meaningful for QBASE.

 

Mayfield, Darnold and Allen DYAR, 2018-present (does not include last night's game):

  • Mayfield:  591
  • Allen:  -438
  • Darnold:  -463

Mayfield was barely above replacement level in 2019 and had a -85 DYAR in his Week 1 game against Baltimore, so of course he's trending down.  He finished with 628 DYAR in his rookie season.

Allen scored a 117 in his Week 1 game of 2020.  Darnold was -63.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Both are only entering Year 3 of their careers this season, so that's not available yet in terms of compare how close QBASE was.

I can give you their DYAR thru 2 years (+ 1 start in Year 3) but it wouldn't be meaningful for QBASE.

 

46 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

Mayfield, Darnold and Allen DYAR, 2018-present (does not include last night's game):

  • Mayfield:  591
  • Allen:  -438
  • Darnold:  -463

Mayfield was barely above replacement level in 2019 and had a -85 DYAR in his Week 1 game against Baltimore, so of course he's trending down.  He finished with 628 DYAR in his rookie season.

Allen scored a 117 in his Week 1 game of 2020.  Darnold was -63.  

Thank you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DYAR is a completely subjective stat surrounded by "advanced stats" armor. Useless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, johnnysd said:

DYAR is a completely subjective stat surrounded by "advanced stats" armor. Useless

What is subjective about it really? It's just a better way of analyzing performance. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

 

Mayfield, Darnold and Allen DYAR, 2018-present (does not include last night's game):

  • Mayfield:  591
  • Allen:  -438
  • Darnold:  -463

Mayfield was barely above replacement level in 2019 and had a -85 DYAR in his Week 1 game against Baltimore, so of course he's trending down.  He finished with 628 DYAR in his rookie season.

Allen scored a 117 in his Week 1 game of 2020.  Darnold was -63.  

Its a disaster....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Qbase rating looks pretty phony.  Why is hack even on the list? Did he ever complete a pass?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looks like a stupid garbage made up bullsh*t metric. don't ever quote this sh*t on this board to evaluate a qb ever again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, johnnysd said:

DYAR is a completely subjective stat surrounded by "advanced stats" armor. Useless

You're right, math is gay.  You FEEL the Jets and Darnold are good, and have no idea why people would think otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rangerous said:

This Qbase rating looks pretty phony.  Why is hack even on the list? Did he ever complete a pass?

He was a -414 DYAR as a prospect, meaning QBASE felt Hackenberg would be a colossal bust.  They were right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, neckdemon said:

looks like a stupid garbage made up bullsh*t metric. don't ever quote this sh*t on this board to evaluate a qb ever again

Again.  Find me a scout or front office that nails their evaluations of QB prospects 50+ % of the time, and can sniff out an eventual bust 75+ % of the time.

QBASE would have steered us away from Mark Sanchez (-184), Bryce Petty (-292) and Christian Hackenberg (-414), and absolutely pushed the Jets to draft Russell Wilson (1561) in 2012.  It also would have told us Pat Mahomes (656) would be the best QB in the 2017 class, and worth taking at 6th overall.  It also would have also told the Jets to draft Lamar Jackson (656) over Sam Darnold (412) in 2018.

But yeah, numbers are stupid and stuff.  I, and others, will be using QBASE on this board plenty of times going forward.  You're just going to have to deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is the best metic we have, then my primary conclusion from this list is that no one metric is particularly useful - which makes sense and what I would expect 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neat tool and if you want to rank this type of stuff sure, it's the most effective I guess (not sure of other similar types of tools) but it's still bogus.  The "data" they use in their equation is completely subjective and often totally wrong.  Cool to look at, definitely not a deciding factor in any fashion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

If that is the best metic we have, then my primary conclusion from this list is that no one metric is particularly useful - which makes sense and what I would expect 

Exactly.  It's a tool that helps with evaluations.  Not the be-all-end-all. 

And this tool is available publicly.  I'm sure NFL front offices, who are investing millions of dollars and putting careers on the line every time they draft a QB, certainly must have their own teams of analytics guys with more complex metrics than these at their disposal.  Well, except for Mike Maccagnan.  He never used analytics at all, and it showed.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JiF said:

Neat tool and if you want to rank this type of stuff sure, it's the most effective I guess (not sure of other similar types of tools) but it's still bogus.  The "data" they use in their equation is completely subjective and often totally wrong.  Cool to look at, definitely not a deciding factor in any fashion. 

I just demonstrated that they're right over 50 % of the time.  Aside from perhaps a panel of JN scouts, I fail to see anyone with a better hit rate out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

I just demonstrated that they're right over 50 % of the time.  Aside from a panel of JN scouts, I fail to see anyone with a better hit rate out there.

No, not that, I'm talking about the subjective criteria they use to make judgement calls on talent and competition are often wrong.  Not the overall results. 

What are you comparing this to?  I dont know of anything similar.  If you're just comparing it to the scouts or GM community or drat results, etc, then it's not really that much different than what they have to say sans Russell Wilson. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JiF said:

No, not that, I'm talking about the subjective criteria they use to make judgement calls on talent and competition are often wrong.  Not the overall results. 

What are you comparing this to?  I dont know of anything similar.  If you're just comparing it to the scouts or GM community or drat results, etc, then it's not really that much different than what they have to say sans Russell Wilson. 

That doesn't play out in the actual results/picks.  If it did, Mahomes would have been taken over Trubisky, Lamar Jackson would have been the 2nd QB off the board in 2018, and no one would have invested high picks in the likes of Ryan Leaf, Sanchez, Josh Freeman, J.P. Losman, Jake Locker, or Rex Grossman.  Listening to this model would have steered teams away from those guys.  

If your argument is consensus is basically = to QBASE, that's dead wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny how there are so many analytics and metrics to determine if a qb is good or not... bc it doesn't feel like it matters at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...