PDA

View Full Version : Jay Cutler a Top four QB



Fan in Exile
06-05-2008, 11:27 AM
I found this article (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/) that ranks QB's based on the how they produced adjusted for the defenses that they faced. I was amazed to see that Cutler ranks fourth. I am totally pumped now for football. Check the second list of QB's which is adjusted for strength of schedule.

Of course the depressing part is that our defense ranks really low, so I hope that they changes this off-season will address that, but who knows at this point.

Hoshdude7
06-05-2008, 04:20 PM
boo yah!

broncogirl7
06-05-2008, 04:26 PM
Awesome...I can't wait for the season to begin and see what the Broncos have to offer.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 04:31 PM
Can I :deadhorse: the Plummer Lovers?

BigDaddyBronco
06-05-2008, 04:37 PM
Can I :deadhorse: the Plummer Lovers?
Is HD one?

OMorange&blue
06-05-2008, 04:38 PM
Can I :deadhorse: the Plummer Lovers?

Beef, Plummer could have been a top 4-5 QB in the NFL. He was just stupid and couldn't throw the ball very well. That was his problem.

BigDaddyBronco
06-05-2008, 04:41 PM
Beef, Plummer could have been a top 4-5 QB in the NFL. He was just stupid and couldn't throw the ball very well. That was his problem.
Hey just cause he could only see one side of the field and had road rage incidents while driving his Honda doesn't mean he is stupid, ok! :D

shank
06-05-2008, 04:46 PM
i liked plummer a lot

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 04:49 PM
Beef, Plummer could have been a top 4-5 QB in the NFL. He was just stupid and couldn't throw the ball very well. That was his problem.

Well, until throwing the ball is a big part of being a NFL quarterback, we will keep Plummer at the top of the list.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 04:50 PM
Is HD one?

Lord no. Some friendships were tested on that one. CSWIL sent me a 5 paragraph PM asking me why I was such a jerk.

BroncoJoe
06-05-2008, 04:52 PM
Can I :deadhorse: the Plummer Lovers?

Only if HD comes back.

Rex
06-05-2008, 04:52 PM
Lord no. Some friendships were tested on that one. CSWIL sent me a 5 paragraph PM asking me why I was such a jerk.

Tested to say the least. Especially when you posted my PM.

Thank God I had Niner's bosom to comfort me.

BroncoJoe
06-05-2008, 04:53 PM
Tested to say the least. Especially when you posted my PM.

Thank God I had Niner's bosom to comfort me.

I never saw that. Dammit.

Rex
06-05-2008, 04:54 PM
I never saw that. Dammit.

Well it was not 5 paragraphs................

NightTrainLayne
06-05-2008, 05:00 PM
Tested to say the least. Especially when you posted my PM.

Thank God I had Niner's bosom to comfort me.

I wish I had been around then. . .I would have known not to pm Beef. :tsk:

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 05:02 PM
That is why I kinda wish CSWIL hitches his trailer to another has been so we can test our friendship again.

TXBRONC
06-05-2008, 05:02 PM
Beef, Plummer could have been a top 4-5 QB in the NFL. He was just stupid and couldn't throw the ball very well. That was his problem.


I don't know if Jake could have ever been a top tier quarterback or that was stupid, but what I do know is that he only did minimum in preparations for games.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 05:03 PM
I don't if Jake could have ever been a top tier quarterback or that was stupid, but what I do know is that he only did minimum in preparations for games.

During the game he wanted to be the best. Kinda like when I am trying to push out a hard dump, I wish I had eaten some carrots.

OMorange&blue
06-05-2008, 05:05 PM
During the game he wanted to be the best. Kinda like when I am trying to push out a hard dump, I wish I had eaten some carrots.

Oatmeal. Its like opening up the bombbay doors.

Rex
06-05-2008, 05:05 PM
That is why I kinda wish CSWIL hitches his trailer to another has been so we can test our friendship again.

I think it has been tested with our recent foray's with DC and Nut.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 05:08 PM
I think it has been tested with our recent foray's with DC and Nut.

I have felt a sense we are drifting apart. I might call you after I drink some liquid courage tonight.

tubby
06-05-2008, 05:08 PM
During the game he wanted to be the best. Kinda like when I am trying to push out a hard dump, I wish I had eaten some carrots.

Yeah but you break a sweat and get it done none the less. Kind of like wins.

Rex
06-05-2008, 05:11 PM
I have felt a sense we are drifting apart. I might call you after I drink some liquid courage tonight.

Yeah. When you ignored my call, that hurt. I even sent you a text about the carwash guy that I thought you would enjoy....but, once again, you must have been thinking about Nut.

BroncoJoe
06-05-2008, 05:12 PM
Yeah. When you ignored my call, that hurt. I even sent you a text about the carwash guy that I thought you would enjoy....but, once again, you must have been thinking about Nut.

You never call me, cs. That hurts. I'll be in the Liberty in about an hour.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 05:13 PM
Yeah but you break a sweat and get it done none the less. Kind of like wins.

No, sometimes I have to stop pushing, and go back and study the tape from some previous successful dumps and come back and try again.

Of course, I have never tried to dump with my weak colon. I am right-coloned. Thus, I dump with my right colon. I never try to dump with my left colon, because it just is not my strong suit.

BeefStew25
06-05-2008, 05:15 PM
Yeah. When you ignored my call, that hurt. I even sent you a text about the carwash guy that I thought you would enjoy....but, once again, you must have been thinking about Nut.

I think about Nut alot.

I was typing him an email, and an email popped up in my email box, and it was from Nut. Here is what it said:

"Beef, I know you are typing me an email right now. You need an apostrophe on the fourth word in the seventh sentance.


Love, Nut"

You never made me feel like that, CSWIL.

TXBRONC
06-05-2008, 05:16 PM
During the game he wanted to be the best. Kinda like when I am trying to push out a hard dump, I wish I had eaten some carrots.

Yep it's hard to be the best during a game if you're not willing to put in extra time needed during the week. :nod:

NB: If you keep yourself hydrated you'll have less problems sqeezing off a loaf. :D

Rex
06-05-2008, 05:16 PM
I think about Nut alot.

I was typing him an email, and an email popped up in my email box, and it was from Nut. Here is what it said:

"Beef, I know you are typing me an email right now. You need an apostrophe on the fourth word in the seventh sentance.


Love, Nut"

You never made me feel like that, CSWIL.

Does Nut have an earbud?

Fan in Exile
06-05-2008, 06:11 PM
When I posted this article this isn't exactly the thread I saw happening.

Lonestar
06-05-2008, 06:11 PM
When I posted this article this isn't exactly the thread I saw happening.

Sometimes happens that way let me try and help

:focus:

Watchthemiddle
06-05-2008, 06:17 PM
I found this article (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/) that ranks QB's based on the how they produced adjusted for the defenses that they faced. I was amazed to see that Cutler ranks fourth. I am totally pumped now for football. Check the second list of QB's which is adjusted for strength of schedule.

Of course the depressing part is that our defense ranks really low, so I hope that they changes this off-season will address that, but who knows at this point.

:crazy: This stuff makes my head spin.

Just show me the basics.....W/L....passing yards, and TD's.

I can't keep up with all the stats these days.

20yardline
06-05-2008, 08:36 PM
I found this article (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/) that ranks QB's based on the how they produced adjusted for the defenses that they faced. I was amazed to see that Cutler ranks fourth. I am totally pumped now for football. Check the second list of QB's which is adjusted for strength of schedule.

Of course the depressing part is that our defense ranks really low, so I hope that they changes this off-season will address that, but who knows at this point.

Jay Cutler (http://www.20yardline.com/denver-broncos-articles/current/jay-cutler.html) has Hall of Fame talent and has the poise to be a great quarterback. I love the way he plays when the game is on the line.

Dean
06-05-2008, 09:19 PM
Jay is a very talented young QB but top four? I don't see it, yet.

I hope he will become a top 4 QB but IMO it's too early to place him that high.

Fan in Exile
06-05-2008, 09:28 PM
Jay is a very talented young QB but top four? I don't see it, yet.

I hope he will become a top 4 QB but IMO it's too early to place him that high.

See that's what I like about the stats, they aren't someone's opinion.

Last year he put up numbers that were top four, when adjusted for the defenses that we faced. I can't wait to see what he can do if marshall is healthy we get a true number two, Scheffler is healthy, and we have a running game.

Fan in Exile
06-05-2008, 09:29 PM
:crazy: This stuff makes my head spin.

Just show me the basics.....W/L....passing yards, and TD's.

I can't keep up with all the stats these days.

I couldn't help but see a little irony between your post and the quote in your sig. You won't even try to understand the stats, but Teddy says you should at least try.

Watchthemiddle
06-05-2008, 10:01 PM
I couldn't help but see a little irony between your post and the quote in your sig. You won't even try to understand the stats, but Teddy says you should at least try.

I don't have a problem with them...i just said it makes my head spin. Why do I need to try and understand some stats that really mean nothing?

Fan in Exile
06-05-2008, 10:21 PM
I don't have a problem with them...i just said it makes my head spin. Why do I need to try and understand some stats that really mean nothing?

Because you have in your sig a quote that talks about trying and not sitting on the sidelines. How do you know they mean nothing if you don't understand them?

Watchthemiddle
06-05-2008, 10:53 PM
Because you have in your sig a quote that talks about trying and not sitting on the sidelines. How do you know they mean nothing if you don't understand them?

I doubt Teddy was talking about stats in a football game....:laugh:

Fan in Exile
06-06-2008, 07:32 AM
I doubt Teddy was talking about stats in a football game....:laugh:

I see the irony is just as lost on you as the stats are...:banghead:

Dean
06-06-2008, 09:07 AM
See that's what I like about the stats, they aren't someone's opinion.

Last year he put up numbers that were top four, when adjusted for the defenses that we faced. I can't wait to see what he can do if marshall is healthy we get a true number two, Scheffler is healthy, and we have a running game.


See that's what I hate about the stats, the adjustment that was used was arbitrary. First, they used total defensive rankings to determine the strength of the defense. For ranking Jay's passing you should use each team's ranking against the pass. How they perform against the run is immaterial to what they are trying to measure. Secondly, how much strength of schedule was weighed versus the QBs performance was also an arbitrary choice. Third, one year of stats allows for statistical abberation versus multiple years of stats. Before we crown Jay, let's see if he is really worthy.

Because a person forms a metric does not mean that the results are valid.

Again I will state that he shows great promise but IMO he isn't the forth best QB, yet.

Fan in Exile
06-06-2008, 10:11 AM
See that's what I hate about the stats, the adjustment that was used was arbitrary. First, they used total defensive rankings to determine the strength of the defense. For ranking Jay's passing you should use each team's ranking against the pass. How they perform against the run is immaterial to what they are trying to measure. Secondly, how much strength of schedule was weighed versus the QBs performance was also an arbitrary choice. Third, one year of stats allows for statistical abberation versus multiple years of stats. Before we crown Jay, let's see if he is really worthy.

Because a person forms a metric does not mean that the results are valid.

Again I will state that he shows great promise but IMO he isn't the forth best QB, yet.

First they didn't use total defensive rankings it was passing defense.

Second it wasn't arbitrary it was based on how they deviate from the average.

Third it was never meant to be a ranking of how the quarterbacks are only a statement of how they performed last year. If you got anything else out of it it's probably from the way that I phrased it.

Fourth last year Jay put up top four numbers. So whatever your opinion is about him not being there yet, that's what he did. It's what is in the books. I'm excited to see what he'll put in the books this year.

Kaylore
06-06-2008, 11:43 AM
Thanks for posting this!

Dean
06-06-2008, 04:01 PM
First they didn't use total defensive rankings it was passing defense.

Second it wasn't arbitrary it was based on how they deviate from the average.

Third it was never meant to be a ranking of how the quarterbacks are only a statement of how they performed last year. If you got anything else out of it it's probably from the way that I phrased it.

Fourth last year Jay put up top four numbers. So whatever your opinion is about him not being there yet, that's what he did. It's what is in the books. I'm excited to see what he'll put in the books this year.

My error. S.O.S. was meant to mean passing strength.

However, I still believe that the amount that the deviation from average was counted to come up with the final ranking was arbitrary. It appears to be weighed equally with the QBs actual performance. If you play a team that is 10% better than average, should your passing yardage be increased by 10%, your TDs by 10%, etc? I know that there is a difference playing a better pass defense but I have problems with it being a linear projection.

Either way it is merely a projection not an actual achievement.

underrated29
06-06-2008, 04:11 PM
here is what jay achieved last year:

3k+ passing yards, 20+ tds thrown, mulitple game winning, saving, tieing drives in the final minutes, losing 35lbs unexpectidley, a rivalry with the bolts, confidence, leadership of the team, knowledge of the playbook, and he caught 5 fish.


For a rookie qb (even though technically it was his 2nd year) on a bad team, with a bad oline and even worse defense, he FREAKING TORE IT UP!!!!!

Fan in Exile
06-06-2008, 05:00 PM
My error. S.O.S. was meant to mean passing strength.

However, I still believe that the amount that the deviation from average was counted to come up with the final ranking was arbitrary. It appears to be weighed equally with the QBs actual performance. If you play a team that is 10% better than average, should your passing yardage be increased by 10%, your TDs by 10%, etc? I know that there is a difference playing a better pass defense but I have problems with it being a linear projection.

Either way it is merely a projection not an actual achievement.

It's not a projection those are the numbers that he put up last year, adjusted for the passing defense that he faced.

S.O.S. is the pass defense which is what the explanations made clear.

Also it's not passing yardage it's adjusted yards per pass which takes into account INT's as well as TD's.

It's also not a straight percentage increase it takes the difference in yards per pass that the defenses gave up and added or subtracted that. This seems to make sense to me although there are of course other factors that aren't taken into account, like injuries.

omac
06-06-2008, 10:28 PM
If I understand this correctly, Cutler had the 2nd toughest SOS against passing defenses in the whole NFL, and still performed pretty good. And no way does he have anywhere near the protection that Brady, Garrard, or Peyton gets. To do that against tough passing defenses with a makeshift OL is very impressive.

Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal
06-06-2008, 11:22 PM
Expect greatness from Cutler, The man has all the energy in the world this year after getting his situation treated. Were very young in alot of places but talented. We also have great character and Shanny has set a work ethic standard really high. Guys are buying into it i can tell. Everybody is competing and talking about competition. I love it. Shanny is going to turn this thing around. Broncos will suprise alot of people this year.

CrazyHorse
06-07-2008, 04:11 PM
If I understand this correctly, Cutler had the 2nd toughest SOS against passing defenses in the whole NFL, and still performed pretty good. And no way does he have anywhere near the protection that Brady, Garrard, or Peyton gets. To do that against tough passing defenses with a makeshift OL is very impressive....And this was with diabetes. With that under control OMG!

Dean
06-07-2008, 04:26 PM
I think that footballoutsider does a better job of evaluating Jay's season. He is rated #10 in DPAR and in DVOA.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php


QUARTERBACKS 2007
Regular season totals, playoffs not included
Revised as of 12/31/2007
QB: Choose Another Year 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 2007: Choose Another Position 2007 QB 2007 RB 2007 WR 2007 TE 2007 OL 2007 DL

Quarterbacks are ranked according to DPAR, or Defense-adjusted Points Above Replacement. This number represents the total number of points scored due to plays where this QB passed or carried the ball, compared to a replacement-level QB in the same game situations. DPAR (and its cousin, PAR, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The other statistic given is DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. This number represents value, per play, over an average QB in the same game situations. The more positive the DVOA rating, the better the player's performance. DVOA (and its cousin, VOA, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The simple version: DPAR means a quarterback with more total value. DVOA means a quarterback with more value per play.

Passes includes sacks and aborted snaps. Both count against a quarterback's value.
Fumbles count the same whether lost to the defense or retained by the offense.

PASSING: Minimum 100 passes, 49 players ranked
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
12-T.Brady NE 200.2 1 200.1 1 62.0% 1 62.0% 599 4663 50 1 3 8 69%
18-P.Manning IND 133.5 2 125.6 2 43.9% 4 40.5% 536 3918 31 4 1 13 65%
4-B.Favre GB 103.2 3 104.6 3 29.8% 5 30.4% 549 4070 28 6 1 14 67%
9-D.Brees NO 99.0 4 96.3 4 19.3% 13 18.4% 670 4274 28 5 4 17 68%
9-D.Garrard JAC 91.4 5 88.0 8 49.6% 2 47.3% 345 2391 18 1 2 3 64%
9-T.Romo DAL 89.1 6 96.3 5 24.7% 8 27.8% 546 4022 36 8 1 19 65%
9-C.Palmer CIN 84.8 7 88.9 7 19.6% 11 21.2% 591 4008 26 4 1 19 65%
8-M.Hasselbeck SEA 78.0 8 94.2 6 16.7% 14 22.9% 594 3736 28 3 2 12 63%
7-B.Roethlisberger PIT 75.4 9 78.5 9 28.1% 6 29.8% 449 2821 32 4 3 11 66%
6-J.Cutler DEN 70.6 10 60.9 12 19.7% 10 15.2% 496 3309 20 5 3 14 64%
3-D.Anderson CLE 65.3 11 74.3 10 15.5% 15 19.5% 535 3678 29 2 2 19 58%
7-J.Garcia TB 59.4 12 62.0 11 26.2% 7 27.9% 344 2324 13 2 1 4 65%
17-P.Rivers SD 54.6 13 47.9 15 14.2% 16 10.8% 486 2976 21 5 5 15 60%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
5-D.McNabb PHI 52.5 14 54.4 14 9.9% 19 10.7% 516 3080 19 3 4 7 62%
13-K.Warner ARI 48.9 15 59.6 13 10.4% 18 15.6% 475 3244 27 6 6 16 63%
8-J.Kitna DET 44.0 16 34.2 18 3.5% 23 -0.3% 612 3766 18 6 6 20 63%
17-J.Campbell WAS 42.7 17 37.6 16 9.8% 20 7.0% 435 2564 12 2 7 11 61%
18-S.Rosenfels HOU 39.3 18 22.3 21 21.7% 9 6.6% 246 1647 15 1 3 12 64%
8-M.Schaub HOU 36.1 19 35.7 17 14.2% 17 13.9% 301 2080 9 3 3 9 67%
15-T.Collins WAS 29.0 20 28.0 19 49.1% 3 46.9% 113 828 5 2 2 0 64%
13-J.Harrington ATL 22.7 21 25.2 20 1.3% 25 2.9% 380 2023 7 0 0 7 62%
5-Q.Gray JAC 20.4 22 21.6 22 19.5% 12 21.3% 154 919 10 1 1 4 56%
10-C.Pennington NYJ 15.6 23 13.0 25 -0.9% 27 -2.9% 285 1579 10 4 0 9 69%
8-C.Redman ATL 13.9 24 15.5 23 8.7% 21 11.2% 157 1027 10 1 1 5 60%
8-D.Culpepper OAK 12.4 25 5.0 33 1.5% 24 -7.4% 209 1176 5 3 3 5 58%
10-V.Young TEN 11.7 26 7.0 28 -6.7% 31 -9.3% 408 2378 9 4 2 17 62%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
7-J.Losman BUF 10.9 27 9.1 26 0.7% 26 -1.6% 188 1101 4 1 1 6 63%
3-M.Moore CAR 8.6 28 4.1 35 3.7% 22 -5.1% 118 686 3 1 0 4 57%
5-T.Edwards BUF 7.8 29 7.2 27 -6.5% 30 -7.0% 280 1519 7 4 0 8 57%
10-E.Manning NYG 7.3 30 6.9 29 -10.2% 35 -10.3% 556 3103 23 5 6 19 56%
10-T.Green MIA 7.1 31 4.4 34 -1.7% 28 -6.2% 146 922 5 1 0 7 62%
7-M.Leinart ARI 4.8 32 5.9 31 -3.6% 29 -1.6% 116 624 2 0 0 3 54%
11-D.Huard KC 4.7 33 3.5 37 -10.1% 34 -10.9% 367 2061 11 2 3 13 62%
10-M.Bulger STL 4.1 34 6.7 30 -10.8% 36 -9.3% 414 2115 11 2 3 13 59%
12-L.McCown TB 3.7 35 13.8 24 -7.4% 32 8.0% 153 904 5 1 2 3 69%
12-B.Croyle KC 3.2 36 -3.8 41 -9.9% 33 -16.9% 240 1115 6 1 3 6 57%
7-K.Boller BAL 1.3 37 1.2 40 -12.1% 37 -12.2% 295 1573 9 1 4 10 62%
7-T.Jackson MIN 0.9 38 5.5 32 -12.4% 38 -9.0% 306 1841 9 1 2 12 60%
14-B.Griese CHI -2.6 39 3.9 36 -15.4% 39 -9.8% 276 1674 9 5 0 12 62%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
14-A.Feeley PHI -2.9 40 -6.2 42 -19.4% 44 -26.5% 106 671 5 1 0 8 57%
8-R.Grossman CHI -3.1 41 -9.1 44 -16.1% 41 -21.9% 247 1206 4 3 2 7 55%
17-C.Lemon MIA -3.2 42 1.5 39 -15.4% 40 -12.1% 334 1596 6 3 3 6 56%
9-S.McNair BAL -4.4 43 3.0 38 -17.7% 42 -10.0% 215 1002 2 1 5 4 65%
11-K.Clemens NYJ -5.6 44 -6.4 43 -18.1% 43 -18.7% 274 1390 5 3 1 9 53%
16-V.Testaverde CAR -11.4 45 -13.0 46 -27.4% 45 -29.3% 181 892 5 2 1 6 55%
8-D.Carr CAR -12.3 46 -17.1 48 -32.5% 46 -40.1% 150 553 3 1 0 5 54%
9-J.Beck MIA -13.1 47 -12.1 45 -39.2% 48 -37.2% 117 492 1 1 4 3 57%
12-G.Frerotte STL -16.6 48 -15.5 47 -35.2% 47 -33.7% 177 955 7 1 1 12 57%
12-J.McCown OAK -25.7 49 -22.4 49 -41.6% 49 -38.0% 207 1067 10 7 4 10 58%
11-A.Smith SF -29.9 50 -25.1 50 -47.0% 50 -41.5% 208 779 2 1 5 4 49%
12-T.Dilfer SF -36.7 51 -35.7 51 -48.2% 51 -47.3% 244 983 7 5 1 11 53%


PASSING, OTHERS: 10-99 passes
Player Team DPAR PAR DVOA VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
5-K.Collins TEN 14.9 17.3 28.3% 35.2% 87 496 0 0 1 0 61%
13-S.Hill SF 12.0 12.8 17.3% 19.4% 84 458 5 0 2 1 69%
17-J.Delhomme CAR 11.1 17.1 14.9% 29.9% 90 583 8 1 0 1 65%
10-T.Smith BAL 8.3 5.3 11.5% 2.6% 81 421 2 1 2 0 53%
12-A.Rodgers GB 8.0 6.7 44.7% 35.6% 30 194 1 0 0 0 74%
9-B.Bollinger MIN 5.4 4.4 8.4% 4.5% 57 355 1 0 1 1 67%
13-K.Holcomb MIN 5.1 2.5 0.8% -6.4% 94 400 2 1 0 1 51%
12-J.Sorgi IND 3.2 1.2 8.5% -5.2% 38 117 1 0 0 0 50%
11-P.Ramsey DEN 2.0 5.1 -3.6% 10.9% 50 247 1 0 1 1 62%
14-B.Johnson DAL 1.0 0.6 8.6% 0.6% 12 70 0 0 0 0 64%
15-S.Wallace SEA 0.1 0.8 -12.7% -7.1% 31 202 2 0 1 1 68%
5-B.Gradkowski TB -0.6 -1.8 -19.0% -30.7% 25 106 0 0 0 1 57%
Player Team DPAR PAR DVOA VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
18-K.Orton CHI -1.2 1.9 -16.5% -7.8% 82 441 3 2 0 2 53%
16-C.Nall GB -2.0 -1.1 -39.5% -28.0% 18 75 1 1 1 0 47%
3-B.Berlin STL -2.3 -0.2 -34.5% -15.5% 28 153 0 0 0 1 61%
17-C.Weinke SF -3.0 -1.9 -40.4% -30.2% 27 73 1 0 0 0 59%
16-C.Batch PIT -5.4 -4.8 -48.6% -44.4% 36 223 2 0 0 3 47%
12-T.Rattay ARI -6.2 -5.5 -61.1% -55.7% 28 163 3 1 0 3 56%
9-C.Frye CLE -6.3 -7.4 -115.5% -132.1% 15 3 0 0 0 1 40%
14-J.O'Sullivan DET -7.1 -6.3 -74.1% -67.3% 30 126 1 1 0 2 50%
7-B.Volek SD -9.2 -10.1 -177.0% -193.4% 13 -3 0 0 1 1 30%
2-J.Russell OAK -10.4 -14.7 -48.0% -62.4% 74 311 2 2 2 4 55%
4-B.Leftwich ATL -12.3 -12.4 -56.1% -56.5% 64 244 1 2 2 2 55%


RUSHING: Minimum 10 rushes, 29 players ranked
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Runs Yards TD FUM
9-D.Garrard JAC 8.4 1 9.0 1 18.0% 6 20.5% 37 199 1 0
7-B.Roethlisberger PIT 8.0 2 6.9 4 23.3% 4 17.8% 30 204 2 1
12-L.McCown TB 7.3 3 7.0 3 112.3% 1 108.2% 10 118 0 0
7-T.Jackson MIN 7.1 4 7.8 2 13.3% 8 16.2% 41 260 3 1
17-C.Lemon MIA 7.0 5 6.0 5 23.3% 5 17.9% 28 103 4 0
6-J.Cutler DEN 6.0 6 5.9 6 8.0% 9 7.3% 29 215 1 1
3-D.Anderson CLE 5.6 7 5.3 7 31.3% 3 29.0% 17 83 3 0
5-D.McNabb PHI 4.7 8 4.4 8 3.3% 11 1.9% 36 243 0 2
9-T.Romo DAL 3.8 9 4.0 9 16.4% 7 18.1% 22 137 2 1
18-S.Rosenfels HOU 3.3 10 3.3 11 36.8% 2 37.0% 10 61 1 0
7-K.Boller BAL 3.3 11 3.6 10 7.5% 10 10.0% 18 96 0 0
9-D.Brees NO 1.6 12 1.1 14 -1.5% 12 -6.3% 14 60 1 0
11-K.Clemens NYJ 1.2 13 0.6 17 -12.4% 16 -15.6% 25 112 1 0
7-J.Garcia TB 1.0 14 1.5 13 -8.4% 15 -5.2% 22 121 1 1
7-M.Leinart ARI 1.0 15 1.0 15 -3.4% 13 -3.1% 10 43 0 0
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Runs Yards TD FUM
12-T.Brady NE 1.0 16 2.0 12 -12.6% 17 -6.7% 24 112 2 1
5-T.Edwards BUF 0.8 17 0.8 16 -5.6% 14 -4.2% 10 52 0 0
8-D.Carr CAR 0.4 18 -0.5 21 -14.6% 18 -24.3% 14 60 0 0
8-M.Schaub HOU 0.2 19 0.4 19 -17.0% 19 -14.7% 14 54 0 0
12-J.McCown OAK -0.2 20 0.5 18 -18.7% 20 -14.2% 26 137 0 0
10-C.Pennington NYJ -0.7 21 -0.7 22 -23.7% 22 -23.4% 14 36 1 1
8-D.Culpepper OAK -1.3 22 0.1 20 -24.9% 23 -11.4% 15 38 3 1
7-J.Losman BUF -1.4 23 -1.6 24 -29.6% 25 -31.3% 18 112 0 2
17-P.Rivers SD -1.6 24 -1.4 23 -28.6% 24 -26.7% 17 41 1 1
10-E.Manning NYG -2.3 25 -1.9 26 -43.4% 27 -40.8% 16 82 1 2
10-V.Young TEN -2.7 26 -1.8 25 -23.2% 21 -21.2% 75 401 3 4
17-J.Campbell WAS -3.1 27 -2.7 27 -32.0% 26 -29.8% 30 183 1 4
8-J.Kitna DET -3.9 28 -4.5 28 -59.3% 29 -65.5% 17 68 0 2
8-M.Hasselbeck SEA -4.0 29 -4.8 29 -44.7% 28 -50.0% 23 104 0 3


©2003-2007 Football Outsiders, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Use || Site enriched by B:COMPLEX Creative and Built for the Future || A Penvelope Kravitz Production.


This doesn't have adjustments like adding 10 points (why ten?) per TD and subtract 45 (???) per interception.

omac
06-07-2008, 06:43 PM
Nice post on the DPAR and DVOA, Dean! :salute:

Brady
P.Manning
B.Favre
D.Brees
D.Garrard
T.Romo
C.Palmer
M.Hasselbeck
Roethlisberger
Cutler

That's pretty good company to be in, and all of them are solid, and have been in the league much longer than Jay. On DVOA, Jay's even better than Brees, Palmer, and Hasselbeck.

For those like me who need a better understanding of DPAR and DVOA, here's the link .....

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php

Although DPAR is the value over a replacement, while DVOA is the value based on average success of a play in a certain situation, DVOA still cannot be determined specifically for a player without taking into consideration his team as a whole, and their contribution to making the play more or less successful ....


DVOA is still far away from the point where we can use it to represent the value of a player separate from the performance of his ten teammates that are also involved in each play. That means that when we say, "Larry Johnson has a DVOA of 27.6%," what we are really saying is "Larry Johnson, playing in the Kansas City offensive system with the Kansas City offensive line blocking for him and Trent Green selling the fake when necessary, has a DVOA of 27.6%."

With that in mind, we can probably say something like, "Jay Cutler has a DVOA of 19.7% which is 10th in the league, while having a makeshift offensive line with 2 starters out and 1 recovering from an injury, having no consistent #1 RB due to injuries, and having different #1 WR targets during the season, also because of injuries".

Now that does sound pretty good. :D

BroncoNut
06-07-2008, 07:21 PM
I wish I had been around then. . .I would have known not to pm Beef. :tsk:

I'm glad you weren't. It was a very tough time for newbies. the horsemen rode hard

TXBRONC
06-07-2008, 07:56 PM
I think that footballoutsider does a better job of evaluating Jay's season. He is rated #10 in DPAR and in DVOA.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php


QUARTERBACKS 2007
Regular season totals, playoffs not included
Revised as of 12/31/2007
QB: Choose Another Year 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 2007: Choose Another Position 2007 QB 2007 RB 2007 WR 2007 TE 2007 OL 2007 DL

Quarterbacks are ranked according to DPAR, or Defense-adjusted Points Above Replacement. This number represents the total number of points scored due to plays where this QB passed or carried the ball, compared to a replacement-level QB in the same game situations. DPAR (and its cousin, PAR, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The other statistic given is DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. This number represents value, per play, over an average QB in the same game situations. The more positive the DVOA rating, the better the player's performance. DVOA (and its cousin, VOA, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The simple version: DPAR means a quarterback with more total value. DVOA means a quarterback with more value per play.

Passes includes sacks and aborted snaps. Both count against a quarterback's value.
Fumbles count the same whether lost to the defense or retained by the offense.

PASSING: Minimum 100 passes, 49 players ranked
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
12-T.Brady NE 200.2 1 200.1 1 62.0% 1 62.0% 599 4663 50 1 3 8 69%
18-P.Manning IND 133.5 2 125.6 2 43.9% 4 40.5% 536 3918 31 4 1 13 65%
4-B.Favre GB 103.2 3 104.6 3 29.8% 5 30.4% 549 4070 28 6 1 14 67%
9-D.Brees NO 99.0 4 96.3 4 19.3% 13 18.4% 670 4274 28 5 4 17 68%
9-D.Garrard JAC 91.4 5 88.0 8 49.6% 2 47.3% 345 2391 18 1 2 3 64%
9-T.Romo DAL 89.1 6 96.3 5 24.7% 8 27.8% 546 4022 36 8 1 19 65%
9-C.Palmer CIN 84.8 7 88.9 7 19.6% 11 21.2% 591 4008 26 4 1 19 65%
8-M.Hasselbeck SEA 78.0 8 94.2 6 16.7% 14 22.9% 594 3736 28 3 2 12 63%
7-B.Roethlisberger PIT 75.4 9 78.5 9 28.1% 6 29.8% 449 2821 32 4 3 11 66%
6-J.Cutler DEN 70.6 10 60.9 12 19.7% 10 15.2% 496 3309 20 5 3 14 64%
3-D.Anderson CLE 65.3 11 74.3 10 15.5% 15 19.5% 535 3678 29 2 2 19 58%
7-J.Garcia TB 59.4 12 62.0 11 26.2% 7 27.9% 344 2324 13 2 1 4 65%
17-P.Rivers SD 54.6 13 47.9 15 14.2% 16 10.8% 486 2976 21 5 5 15 60%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
5-D.McNabb PHI 52.5 14 54.4 14 9.9% 19 10.7% 516 3080 19 3 4 7 62%
13-K.Warner ARI 48.9 15 59.6 13 10.4% 18 15.6% 475 3244 27 6 6 16 63%
8-J.Kitna DET 44.0 16 34.2 18 3.5% 23 -0.3% 612 3766 18 6 6 20 63%
17-J.Campbell WAS 42.7 17 37.6 16 9.8% 20 7.0% 435 2564 12 2 7 11 61%
18-S.Rosenfels HOU 39.3 18 22.3 21 21.7% 9 6.6% 246 1647 15 1 3 12 64%
8-M.Schaub HOU 36.1 19 35.7 17 14.2% 17 13.9% 301 2080 9 3 3 9 67%
15-T.Collins WAS 29.0 20 28.0 19 49.1% 3 46.9% 113 828 5 2 2 0 64%
13-J.Harrington ATL 22.7 21 25.2 20 1.3% 25 2.9% 380 2023 7 0 0 7 62%
5-Q.Gray JAC 20.4 22 21.6 22 19.5% 12 21.3% 154 919 10 1 1 4 56%
10-C.Pennington NYJ 15.6 23 13.0 25 -0.9% 27 -2.9% 285 1579 10 4 0 9 69%
8-C.Redman ATL 13.9 24 15.5 23 8.7% 21 11.2% 157 1027 10 1 1 5 60%
8-D.Culpepper OAK 12.4 25 5.0 33 1.5% 24 -7.4% 209 1176 5 3 3 5 58%
10-V.Young TEN 11.7 26 7.0 28 -6.7% 31 -9.3% 408 2378 9 4 2 17 62%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
7-J.Losman BUF 10.9 27 9.1 26 0.7% 26 -1.6% 188 1101 4 1 1 6 63%
3-M.Moore CAR 8.6 28 4.1 35 3.7% 22 -5.1% 118 686 3 1 0 4 57%
5-T.Edwards BUF 7.8 29 7.2 27 -6.5% 30 -7.0% 280 1519 7 4 0 8 57%
10-E.Manning NYG 7.3 30 6.9 29 -10.2% 35 -10.3% 556 3103 23 5 6 19 56%
10-T.Green MIA 7.1 31 4.4 34 -1.7% 28 -6.2% 146 922 5 1 0 7 62%
7-M.Leinart ARI 4.8 32 5.9 31 -3.6% 29 -1.6% 116 624 2 0 0 3 54%
11-D.Huard KC 4.7 33 3.5 37 -10.1% 34 -10.9% 367 2061 11 2 3 13 62%
10-M.Bulger STL 4.1 34 6.7 30 -10.8% 36 -9.3% 414 2115 11 2 3 13 59%
12-L.McCown TB 3.7 35 13.8 24 -7.4% 32 8.0% 153 904 5 1 2 3 69%
12-B.Croyle KC 3.2 36 -3.8 41 -9.9% 33 -16.9% 240 1115 6 1 3 6 57%
7-K.Boller BAL 1.3 37 1.2 40 -12.1% 37 -12.2% 295 1573 9 1 4 10 62%
7-T.Jackson MIN 0.9 38 5.5 32 -12.4% 38 -9.0% 306 1841 9 1 2 12 60%
14-B.Griese CHI -2.6 39 3.9 36 -15.4% 39 -9.8% 276 1674 9 5 0 12 62%
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
14-A.Feeley PHI -2.9 40 -6.2 42 -19.4% 44 -26.5% 106 671 5 1 0 8 57%
8-R.Grossman CHI -3.1 41 -9.1 44 -16.1% 41 -21.9% 247 1206 4 3 2 7 55%
17-C.Lemon MIA -3.2 42 1.5 39 -15.4% 40 -12.1% 334 1596 6 3 3 6 56%
9-S.McNair BAL -4.4 43 3.0 38 -17.7% 42 -10.0% 215 1002 2 1 5 4 65%
11-K.Clemens NYJ -5.6 44 -6.4 43 -18.1% 43 -18.7% 274 1390 5 3 1 9 53%
16-V.Testaverde CAR -11.4 45 -13.0 46 -27.4% 45 -29.3% 181 892 5 2 1 6 55%
8-D.Carr CAR -12.3 46 -17.1 48 -32.5% 46 -40.1% 150 553 3 1 0 5 54%
9-J.Beck MIA -13.1 47 -12.1 45 -39.2% 48 -37.2% 117 492 1 1 4 3 57%
12-G.Frerotte STL -16.6 48 -15.5 47 -35.2% 47 -33.7% 177 955 7 1 1 12 57%
12-J.McCown OAK -25.7 49 -22.4 49 -41.6% 49 -38.0% 207 1067 10 7 4 10 58%
11-A.Smith SF -29.9 50 -25.1 50 -47.0% 50 -41.5% 208 779 2 1 5 4 49%
12-T.Dilfer SF -36.7 51 -35.7 51 -48.2% 51 -47.3% 244 983 7 5 1 11 53%


PASSING, OTHERS: 10-99 passes
Player Team DPAR PAR DVOA VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
5-K.Collins TEN 14.9 17.3 28.3% 35.2% 87 496 0 0 1 0 61%
13-S.Hill SF 12.0 12.8 17.3% 19.4% 84 458 5 0 2 1 69%
17-J.Delhomme CAR 11.1 17.1 14.9% 29.9% 90 583 8 1 0 1 65%
10-T.Smith BAL 8.3 5.3 11.5% 2.6% 81 421 2 1 2 0 53%
12-A.Rodgers GB 8.0 6.7 44.7% 35.6% 30 194 1 0 0 0 74%
9-B.Bollinger MIN 5.4 4.4 8.4% 4.5% 57 355 1 0 1 1 67%
13-K.Holcomb MIN 5.1 2.5 0.8% -6.4% 94 400 2 1 0 1 51%
12-J.Sorgi IND 3.2 1.2 8.5% -5.2% 38 117 1 0 0 0 50%
11-P.Ramsey DEN 2.0 5.1 -3.6% 10.9% 50 247 1 0 1 1 62%
14-B.Johnson DAL 1.0 0.6 8.6% 0.6% 12 70 0 0 0 0 64%
15-S.Wallace SEA 0.1 0.8 -12.7% -7.1% 31 202 2 0 1 1 68%
5-B.Gradkowski TB -0.6 -1.8 -19.0% -30.7% 25 106 0 0 0 1 57%
Player Team DPAR PAR DVOA VOA Passes Yards TD FK FL INT Comp
%
18-K.Orton CHI -1.2 1.9 -16.5% -7.8% 82 441 3 2 0 2 53%
16-C.Nall GB -2.0 -1.1 -39.5% -28.0% 18 75 1 1 1 0 47%
3-B.Berlin STL -2.3 -0.2 -34.5% -15.5% 28 153 0 0 0 1 61%
17-C.Weinke SF -3.0 -1.9 -40.4% -30.2% 27 73 1 0 0 0 59%
16-C.Batch PIT -5.4 -4.8 -48.6% -44.4% 36 223 2 0 0 3 47%
12-T.Rattay ARI -6.2 -5.5 -61.1% -55.7% 28 163 3 1 0 3 56%
9-C.Frye CLE -6.3 -7.4 -115.5% -132.1% 15 3 0 0 0 1 40%
14-J.O'Sullivan DET -7.1 -6.3 -74.1% -67.3% 30 126 1 1 0 2 50%
7-B.Volek SD -9.2 -10.1 -177.0% -193.4% 13 -3 0 0 1 1 30%
2-J.Russell OAK -10.4 -14.7 -48.0% -62.4% 74 311 2 2 2 4 55%
4-B.Leftwich ATL -12.3 -12.4 -56.1% -56.5% 64 244 1 2 2 2 55%


RUSHING: Minimum 10 rushes, 29 players ranked
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Runs Yards TD FUM
9-D.Garrard JAC 8.4 1 9.0 1 18.0% 6 20.5% 37 199 1 0
7-B.Roethlisberger PIT 8.0 2 6.9 4 23.3% 4 17.8% 30 204 2 1
12-L.McCown TB 7.3 3 7.0 3 112.3% 1 108.2% 10 118 0 0
7-T.Jackson MIN 7.1 4 7.8 2 13.3% 8 16.2% 41 260 3 1
17-C.Lemon MIA 7.0 5 6.0 5 23.3% 5 17.9% 28 103 4 0
6-J.Cutler DEN 6.0 6 5.9 6 8.0% 9 7.3% 29 215 1 1
3-D.Anderson CLE 5.6 7 5.3 7 31.3% 3 29.0% 17 83 3 0
5-D.McNabb PHI 4.7 8 4.4 8 3.3% 11 1.9% 36 243 0 2
9-T.Romo DAL 3.8 9 4.0 9 16.4% 7 18.1% 22 137 2 1
18-S.Rosenfels HOU 3.3 10 3.3 11 36.8% 2 37.0% 10 61 1 0
7-K.Boller BAL 3.3 11 3.6 10 7.5% 10 10.0% 18 96 0 0
9-D.Brees NO 1.6 12 1.1 14 -1.5% 12 -6.3% 14 60 1 0
11-K.Clemens NYJ 1.2 13 0.6 17 -12.4% 16 -15.6% 25 112 1 0
7-J.Garcia TB 1.0 14 1.5 13 -8.4% 15 -5.2% 22 121 1 1
7-M.Leinart ARI 1.0 15 1.0 15 -3.4% 13 -3.1% 10 43 0 0
Player Team DPAR DPAR
Rank PAR PAR
Rank DVOA DVOA
Rank VOA Runs Yards TD FUM
12-T.Brady NE 1.0 16 2.0 12 -12.6% 17 -6.7% 24 112 2 1
5-T.Edwards BUF 0.8 17 0.8 16 -5.6% 14 -4.2% 10 52 0 0
8-D.Carr CAR 0.4 18 -0.5 21 -14.6% 18 -24.3% 14 60 0 0
8-M.Schaub HOU 0.2 19 0.4 19 -17.0% 19 -14.7% 14 54 0 0
12-J.McCown OAK -0.2 20 0.5 18 -18.7% 20 -14.2% 26 137 0 0
10-C.Pennington NYJ -0.7 21 -0.7 22 -23.7% 22 -23.4% 14 36 1 1
8-D.Culpepper OAK -1.3 22 0.1 20 -24.9% 23 -11.4% 15 38 3 1
7-J.Losman BUF -1.4 23 -1.6 24 -29.6% 25 -31.3% 18 112 0 2
17-P.Rivers SD -1.6 24 -1.4 23 -28.6% 24 -26.7% 17 41 1 1
10-E.Manning NYG -2.3 25 -1.9 26 -43.4% 27 -40.8% 16 82 1 2
10-V.Young TEN -2.7 26 -1.8 25 -23.2% 21 -21.2% 75 401 3 4
17-J.Campbell WAS -3.1 27 -2.7 27 -32.0% 26 -29.8% 30 183 1 4
8-J.Kitna DET -3.9 28 -4.5 28 -59.3% 29 -65.5% 17 68 0 2
8-M.Hasselbeck SEA -4.0 29 -4.8 29 -44.7% 28 -50.0% 23 104 0 3


©2003-2007 Football Outsiders, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Use || Site enriched by B:COMPLEX Creative and Built for the Future || A Penvelope Kravitz Production.


This doesn't have adjustments like adding 10 points (why ten?) per TD and subtract 45 (???) per interception.

Being in the top ten means he has room to grow.

Fan in Exile
06-08-2008, 07:17 AM
So Dean you're more comfortable with a sight that doesn't tell you what the adjustments are than with a sight that does tell you? FO does the same things with their stats they just don't tell anyone what the numbers are.

I don't really trust their number since I tried to use the KUBIAK system for fantasy football. I found it to have a very low rate of predictive success compared to the cheet sheets from another site.

In case you're wondering about the 10/45 those numbers where picked because they had the best correlation to winning. It's my understanding that's why those numbers were picked.

Dean
06-08-2008, 03:44 PM
So Dean you're more comfortable with a sight that doesn't tell you what the adjustments are than with a sight that does tell you? FO does the same things with their stats they just don't tell anyone what the numbers are.

I don't really trust their number since I tried to use the KUBIAK system for fantasy football. I found it to have a very low rate of predictive success compared to the cheet sheets from another site.

In case you're wondering about the 10/45 those numbers where picked because they had the best correlation to winning. It's my understanding that's why those numbers were picked.

Omac has the URL where footballoustiders explains their system. . .but yes it is a projection too. It is a subjective guess as to how to manipulate the actual statistics of one individual to compare with another. I understand that. I have been playing and coaching football for over 45 yearsand I can't see that Jay produced at the #4 level last year. This is more in line with what I saw him do.

A QB has to score 9 TDs to be equivalent to 2 interceptions in terms of winning and losing? :questionmark: I would like to see the data on that; it seems to be overweighing the negative effect of interceptions.

Whatever, the topic is losing its' interest. :ciao:

Fan in Exile
06-10-2008, 11:26 AM
Omac has the URL where footballoustiders explains their system. . .but yes it is a projection too. It is a subjective guess as to how to manipulate the actual statistics of one individual to compare with another. I understand that. I have been playing and coaching football for over 45 yearsand I can't see that Jay produced at the #4 level last year. This is more in line with what I saw him do.

A QB has to score 9 TDs to be equivalent to 2 interceptions in terms of winning and losing? :questionmark: I would like to see the data on that; it seems to be overweighing the negative effect of interceptions.

Whatever, the topic is losing its' interest. :ciao:

The fact that you keep misusing the word projection makes me seriously doubt that you do understand them but I have certainly lost interest in talking with you so we seem to have reached agreement on something.