QB dept. : " Sheer luck buoyed Mark Sanchez's stats " ~ ~ ~

[serphnx]

They probably have a stat like that too. Like I said, if Sanchez had 2 and Eli had 3 and Brady 1, that's not very meaningful to discuss in terms of Sanchez. This one is interesting cause Sanchez was 67% higher then the guy with the 2nd most dropped INT's and 15x greater then the lowset (henne). Add in the fact that Sanchez is a premier name on a premier team, and I don't understand why it's so confusing that someone would write about this, and why some people would find it interesting.

Any stat where Henne has the highest and Sanchez and Brees have the lowest (or whoever the second was, what was it, Sanchez-Brees-Peyton?) I'd be glad with the company Sanchez is in and think it's indicative that it's something elite players just have a knack for.

I'm sure there's some doofus somewhere that thinks Mike Tysons first 20 fights were all just luck too.

[CTM]

Any stat where Henne has the highest and Sanchez and Brees have the lowest (or whoever the second was, what was it, Sanchez-Brees-Peyton?) I'd be glad with the company Sanchez is in and think it's indicative that it's something elite players just have a knack for.

I'm sure there's some doofus somewhere that thinks Mike Tysons first 20 fights were all just luck too.

So your position is that throwing the ball to a defenders and having them drop it is indicitive of elite play?

[serphnx]

So your position is that throwing the ball to a defenders and having them drop it is indicitive of elite play?

My position is that if Peyton and Brees do something and you do it too, but Henne does the opposite, you're probably in better company and doing something right.

It's just funny that the elite QBs in this league are harder to intercept than the sh*tty ones, and people are actually arguing that shows somebody sucks.

In elite high level competition frequently the elite players do simple things correctly and the lesser players fail to do those things when playing against them. Intercepting a Sanchez pass is obviously harder to do than a sh*tty Henne pass.

[BroadwayJ667]

Here is the simplest way to sum this up. This is generally a rule for most aspects of life too.

It either happened or it didn't. Nobody cares about the what if, or this could have happened. Mark's stats are what they are to this point. He is 19-11 as the Jets starting quarterback and 4-2 in the playoffs; making the AFC title game in his first two years. He is from one perspective the winningest quarterback in his first two years, short of winning a superbowl.

Ignore stats that don't matter. Fact is there is only one stat that any head coach in an NFL locker room cares about. Wins.

[dbatesman]

It's just funny that the elite QBs in this league are harder to intercept than the sh*tty ones, and people are actually arguing that shows somebody sucks.

That's news to me.

[CTM]

My position is that if Peyton and Brees do something and you do it too, but Henne does the opposite, you're probably in better company and doing something right.

It's just funny that the elite QBs in this league are harder to intercept than the sh*tty ones, and people are actually arguing that shows somebody sucks.

Manning had 679 passes thrown with 9 dropped INTs, Sanchez had 507 with 15.. those numbers aren't even in the same ballpark..

Intercepting a Sanchez pass is obviously harder to do than a sh*tty Henne pass.

not obvious to me, in fact it makes no sense

[PFSIKH]

Why is this thread still going on?

[Larz]

Why is this thread still going on?

pennington is gone, and we can't complain about which FA we signed for too much money who won't help anyweay

[#27TheDominator]

Why is this thread still going on?

pennington is gone, and we can't complain about which FA we signed for too much money who won't help anyweay

C'mon Larz. May I remind you?

FIRE SCHOTTENHEIMER!!!!!!!!!!

[Kleckineau]

Joe McKnight said he gets nauseous and pukes whenever a Sanchez int. is dropped.

[ZachEY]

LOL. Yeah, they are. That's why there is an official scorer at each game and he actually changes error calls during the game or even later.

As to the article, "dropped interceptions" is a non-stat. With dropped passes the QB is intentionally throwing the ball at the receiver, who is trained to catch the ball, and for some reason the ball is dropped from his hands/chest, etc.

With FO's "stat" we have to consider a defender, not trained to catch passes, being the unintended target and having to adjust to a play and then make a play. There are too many assumptions in order to say the DB should have made the interception.

It's far easier to catch a pass as a receiver than it is to intercept it. The receiver & QB know where the ball is going. They know the route and distance. A DB has to guess and react in split second to make a play.

Consider that Roddy White led the NFL in receptions with 115 while Ed Reed led the NFL in INTs with 8. To profer that there is such a stat as "dropped interceptions" is ridiculous.

You can say all you want about the "dropped interceptions" issue, but what's being ignored is that whether or not you love the stat, it's not just Sanchez being scrutinized by it. The concept may not be perfect, but every QB is being judged over identical metrics. So, within this somewhat imperfect measure, Sanchez was the worst.

That said, anecdotally, Sanchez seemed to 'get away with a lot of bad passes' last year. I don't need a stat to back that up, but he did at times seem to get lucky, maybe more then most. This FO stat kind of confirms that feeling.

Granted, he got hurt by a bunch of ill-timed drops, but is there anyone who thinks that he doesn't need some significant improvement?

[ZachEY]

My final stats: There were 527 TOTAL INTs thrown in the NFL last year. There were 10,185 total receptions last year. The Colts and Saints each had 450 receptions as a team, 77 less than the total INTs thrown by every QB in the NFL last year.

For every INT there was 19 receptions.

For FOs' "stat" to be accurate about Sanchez (or any other QB) that means he should have had 285 more dropped passes. It's an absurd number because "dropped interceptions" is an absurd "stat."

i honestly have no idea what point you think your making

For you, that's understandable.

I'll make it simple: statistically speaking, an INT is 19 times harder to achieve than a reception and, thus, you can't assume that an INT should have been made just as we assume a reception should have been made.

Based on statistics, a DB SHOULDN'T catch every ball that hits him in the hands just like a batter shouldn't get a hit every time he makes contact and puts the ball in play.

Um... What?

Your analysis has completely negated intent. A DB catches less passes than a WR because the person before holding the ball before either one gets their hands on it is intending on throwing it to the WR. Of course WRs will make more catches than DBs, the point your trying to make doesn't even come close to being valid.

A more relevant comparison would be if you were to try and compare percentage of 'drops' by DBs vs. by WRs. And yet, still that would be pretty damn irrelevant to what I can see with my own eyes, and FO, who I only read when it's posted here (and rarely even then) has somewhat confirmed, 'Sanchez throws too many bad passes'. I'm really not sure why WRs catching more passes than DBs over the course of every NFL season somehow gives invalidates this.

[JiFtheOracle]

Granted, he got hurt by a bunch of ill-timed drops, but is there anyone who thinks that he doesn't need some significant improvement?

Of course he does, nobody in their right mind would see he's right where he needs to be...but in the same mind, claiming he improved his stats because of "sheer luck" could honestly be the most moronic thing I've ever heard and that has nothing to do with the validity of the stat nor the subject they are scrutinizing.

[ZachEY]

Of course he does, nobody in their right mind would see he's right where he needs to be...but in the same mind, claiming he improved his stats because of "sheer luck" could honestly be the most moronic thing I've ever heard and that has nothing to do with the validity of the stat nor the subject they are scrutinizing.

I don't really care what the article says... Once you add something like, 'pure luck', your adding something unquantifiable hyperbole to data that can otherwise be quantified.

My feeling from this season is that Sanchez threw too many bad passes, FO points out that he did as well. Hopefully next year he throws less bad passes, because if he does, the Jets will be a better team. The end.

[JiFtheOracle]

I don't really care what the article says... Once you add something like, 'pure luck', your adding something unquantifiable hyperbole to data that can otherwise be quantified.

My feeling from this season is that Sanchez threw too many bad passes, FO points out that he did as well. Hopefully next year he throws less bad passes, because if he does, the Jets will be a better team. The end.

Which has been my position this entire time.

Also, I dont need FO to point out that Mark Sanchez has a lot of room to improve which will positively impact the Jets. Its pretty simple to watch the game and see he's either awful, or good, but can come up clutch in the big moments/games. If it takes some genius statistician to show you that, cool. I'm capable of figuring this out by watching the game. The end.

[#27TheDominator]

Granted, he got hurt by a bunch of ill-timed drops, but is there anyone who thinks that he doesn't need some significant improvement?

I wonder about this. There are some guys that don't throw a catchable ball. The Browning Nagles of the world. Others do, like Pennington. I bet it was easier to catch a Pennington INT than a Browning Nagle. I don't think Sanchez throws a difficult ball. In the case of Sanchez I wonder if it has anything to do with when he throws. We call complain about the play calling and lack of rhythm. DBs don't have a rhythm that passes are coming either. Just a WAG of a theory, but why not?

[RutgersJetFan]

Wow this one's still going huh...

[Larz]

I wonder about this. There are some guys that don't throw a catchable ball. The Browning Nagles of the world. Others do, like Pennington. I bet it was easier to catch a Pennington INT than a Browning Nagle. I don't think Sanchez throws a difficult ball. In the case of Sanchez I wonder if it has anything to do with when he throws. We call complain about the play calling and lack of rhythm. DBs don't have a rhythm that passes are coming either. Just a WAG of a theory, but why not?

that's not crazy, but the oldest saying in the books when a DB drops a pass is, "and that's why he's on defense"

sanchez is lucky

I'll take it, it beats o'donnell hurting himself warming up and making a nobody SB MVP

[CTM]

Which has been my position this entire time.

you don't even understand what that means dummy..

he just call you a tool

[Aten]

Either Lewin's so dumb as to misconstrue the system's blunt-instrument utility, or he's so pompous as to think his own half-baked observations can transcend it.

Let's not forget that Lewin is sort of a joke as far as the real nerds are concerned. You also have to recognize the conundrum these guys are in. When the stats get too good, they're only good for making money and spoiling fun. The games become less interesting as the ability of the models to explain outcomes increases. Advanced metrics have basically ruined baseball for me and they're getting there on basketball. With football, due to the increased strategic complexity and number of variables, they're basically where you'd like them to be as a casual observer -- better than your eyes but still not great -- but their being so just tends to prompt stupid arguments like this one.

[dbatesman]

Let's not forget that Lewin is sort of a joke as far as the real nerds are concerned. You also have to recognize the conundrum these guys are in. When the stats get too good, they're only good for making money and spoiling fun. The games become less interesting as the ability of the models to explain outcomes increases. Advanced metrics have basically ruined baseball for me and they're getting there on basketball. With football, due to the increased strategic complexity and number of variables, they're basically where you'd like them to be as a casual observer -- better than your eyes but still not great -- but their being so just tends to prompt stupid arguments like this one.

You almost feel for Lewin in a way. Smart people hate him because he's full of sh*t. Dumb people hate him because he doesn't evaluate QBs based on guaponess.

[Matt39]

Let's not forget that Lewin is sort of a joke as far as the real nerds are concerned. You also have to recognize the conundrum these guys are in. When the stats get too good, they're only good for making money and spoiling fun. The games become less interesting as the ability of the models to explain outcomes increases. Advanced metrics have basically ruined baseball for me and they're getting there on basketball. With football, due to the increased strategic complexity and number of variables, they're basically where you'd like them to be as a casual observer -- better than your eyes but still not great -- but their being so just tends to prompt stupid arguments like this one.

Word. We all had the Rangers and Giants in the playoffs.

[T0mShane]

Let's not forget that Lewin is sort of a joke as far as the real nerds are concerned. You also have to recognize the conundrum these guys are in. When the stats get too good, they're only good for making money and spoiling fun. The games become less interesting as the ability of the models to explain outcomes increases. Advanced metrics have basically ruined baseball for me and they're getting there on basketball. With football, due to the increased strategic complexity and number of variables, they're basically where you'd like them to be as a casual observer -- better than your eyes but still not great -- but their being so just tends to prompt stupid arguments like this one.

You almost feel for Lewin in a way. Smart people hate him because he's full of sh*t. Dumb people hate him because he doesn't evaluate QBs based on guaponess.

If you guys abandon advanced metrics after making us read all that sh*t and acknowledge (if not understand) its value, I'm going to flip out.

[#27TheDominator]

POINTS SCORED > POINTS ALLOWED = GOOD

POINTS SCORED < POINTS ALLOWED = BAD

[Klecko73isGod]

If you guys abandon advanced metrics after making us read all that sh*t and acknowledge (if not understand) its value, I'm going to flip out.

It's almost as if some of the nerds are grabbing their crotches and shouting "ADVANCE THIS METRIC MOTHERF**KER!"

[Klecko73isGod]

POINTS SCORED > POINTS ALLOWED = GOOD

POINTS SCORED < POINTS ALLOWED = BAD

[JohnnyHector]

Advanced metrics have basically ruined baseball for me and they're getting there on basketball

Being a Mets fan has ruined baseball for me, so at least advanced metrics give me a leg up on the lunkheads in my fantasy leagues.

[JiFtheOracle]

Word. We all had the Rangers and Giants in the playoffs.

Metrics bitch!!!

[Matt39]

Metrics bitch!!!

Metrics in baseball do clarify quite a bit. In basketball they get a bit shakier and are overall the advanced ones are kind of inadequate. Football...forget it.

Not sure why anyone would enjoy sports less because others are coming up with different ways to measure things.