Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

JohnTurney wrote:So, I asked for comments from folks, you stated your views, and that's fine. Those comments are appreciated, but they were not so definitive that they couldn't be challenged to some degree, which I did. I think then, and do now, there is some of that systemic upward pressure on the numbers, but not enough to see a great quarterback get better, as he clearly did. He upped his game, via comments from opponents, coaches, awards and statistics.

In PFR's "advanced passing" statistics, they have a Rate+ stat that is a passer efficiency rating relative to a rolling 3-year league average. If you look at Tom Brady, it kind of supports rhickok's conclusion that Brady's strong 2nd half career is based on 3 big years....but Brady's other 2nd half years, while comparable to his 1st half years, are still slightly better than his 1st half years even when accounting for league averages. I would expect a QB's efficiency numbers to go down as he is asked to carry more of the load, but in Brady's case his efficiency numbers have gone up relative to league average even while his passing attempts have increased and his team's defensive performance has slackened. I think this is "proof" that Brady has gotten better as he has aged, but that is just my interpretation of the events.

JohnTurney wrote:
So, I asked for comments from folks, you stated your views, and that's fine. Those comments are appreciated, but they were not so definitive that they couldn't be challenged to some degree, which I did. I think then, and do now, there is some of that systemic upward pressure on the numbers, but not enough to see a great quarterback get better, as he clearly did. He upped his game, via comments from opponents, coaches, awards and statistics.

Sorry, just not seeing it.

Let's get out of the weeds. There are three tiers of quarterbacks: 1) playmakers, 2) game managers, and 3) stiffs. Playmakers carry their team, lead their team, and, given the opportunity, have the ability to put together clutch, game winning drives where the pressure is on them even in situations where their team hasn't played well up to that point. Game managers will *occasionally* win a game, sometimes but not often lose them, and rarely have the ability to play above or below the level of the team surrounding them. Stiffs, no further comments necessary.

Obviously, Brady is a playmaker. From the second he stepped on the field he's possessed the traits of a playmaker. I've seen no material upward or downward tick in his game at all.

To your main summary points:

- "Via comments from opponents" - ever tell someone you haven't seen in a while how good they look, even when they don't? Ever compliment people out of politeness? Ever shy away from saying something that might fire someone up? Players wouldn't do this...would they?

- "Coaches" - ever tell someone you haven't seen in a while how good they look, even when they don't? Ever compliment people out of politeness? Ever shy away from saying something that might fire someone up? Coaches wouldn't do this...would they?

(regarding the above two categories...the "others agree with me" is really a weak argument anyway, isn't it?)

- "Awards" - A popularity contest, so inconsistent as to be almost meaningless. "American Beauty" is one of the best movies ever made. Why? It won an Oscar. Watch it. Not bad, but do you think it's one of history's greatest flicks? Find this analogy disingenuous? I don't.

- "Statistics" - Well, here you have me. You have indeed proved that Brady's statistics are better, which, quite frankly, anyone glancing briefly at P-F-R could do but didn't because the observation is so simplistic and applies to almost anyone, as multiple posters in this thread already proved. So congratulations, you've proved milk tastes better today than it did yesterday because the price is higher.

Not convinced at all.

JohnTurney wrote:

Finally, it's not your thoughts that may have caused a dust up, it's could be the tone and attitude in which you express them, so cock-sure and dismissive of other's thoughts while you use non-quantifiable terms such as "killer". How can anyone debate with that?

What's the matter, John? Did I take the chair reserved for you?

mwald wrote:Sorry, just not seeing it.

Let's get out of the weeds. There are three tiers of quarterbacks: 1) playmakers, 2) game managers, and 3) stiffs. Etc., etc., etc.

I have a suggestion:

You could save a lot of time if you just said "I know all about this stuff, and next to me the rest of you are all idiots." You could probably put that on some kind of save key and just hit it every time you want to make a post, since that's the message and tone of every one.

mwald wrote: Let's get out of the weeds. There are three tiers of quarterbacks: 1) playmakers, 2) game managers, and 3) stiffs.

This type of analysis is much more enlightening than mere statistics. Where does "killer" fit in amongst the three tiers? Is it applicable only to 1) playmakers, or can it be used for all three tiers, such as "Ryan Fitzpatrick is a killer game manager...an absolute killer"?

I'm glad you feel the need to continue to post in this thread. Your asinine swipes at John Turney add nothing to the football discussion, and I am surprised you are still allowed to post here.

Bob Gill wrote:

mwald wrote:Sorry, just not seeing it.

Let's get out of the weeds. There are three tiers of quarterbacks: 1) playmakers, 2) game managers, and 3) stiffs. Etc., etc., etc.

I have a suggestion:

You could save a lot of time if you just said "I know all about this stuff, and next to me the rest of you are all idiots." You could probably put that on some kind of save key and just hit it every time you want to make a post, since that's the message of every one.

Hey, sorry you feel that way Bob. Have a nice day.

Bryan wrote:
This type of analysis is much more enlightening than mere statistics. Where does "killer" fit in amongst the three tiers? Is it applicable only to 1) playmakers, or can it be used for all three tiers, such as "Ryan Fitzpatrick is a killer game manager...an absolute killer"?

Actually, took my lead from Bruce Arians this week who said Carson Palmer needed to display more of a killer instinct. Apparently Arians doesn't know what he's talking about either...

mwald wrote:milk tastes better today than it did yesterday because the price is higher.

This is a great line as applied to the 'improved' passing statistics.

Everything else, I don't know? ... but the back and forth bickering definitely doesn't improve the football discussion - though this was probably an odd discussion from the start as evidenced by the multiple people who were confused and/or pointed out the common sense reasons.

Reaser wrote:

mwald wrote:milk tastes better today than it did yesterday because the price is higher.

This is a great line as applied to the 'improved' passing statistics.

Thanks, other than a mallet to the head the metaphor is still the best way to get a point across.

As for the rest, decorum interests me (but not at the expense of the truth). Playing follow the leader? Not so much.

Take it easy.

Reaser wrote:

mwald wrote:milk tastes better today than it did yesterday because the price is higher.

This is a great line as applied to the 'improved' passing statistics.

Everything else, I don't know? ... but the back and forth bickering definitely doesn't improve the football discussion - though this was probably an odd discussion from the start as evidenced by the multiple people who were confused and/or pointed out the common sense reasons.

Except that its not really applicable to this particular discussion. While passing numbers have obviously improved across the board, Brady's numbers have improved at a higher rate than the league average...and he has done so while being a larger part of the Patriots offense when compared to his early years. If people can't wrap their heads around a relatively simple statistical concept of comparing a set of numbers to the mean, then I guess you are correct in saying that people would be confused right away. Its like this discussion is taking place on two different levels of comprehension.