Jump to content


Fitz Total QBR For 2012


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 T master

T master

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,753 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:13 PM

Fitz is ranked as the #22 QB in the NFL this year with a total QBR rating of 48.1 which isn't all that great .

But if you consider some of the posts on here that say we need to get Vick he is on the bottom of the QBR , so is Cam Newton , Bradford , Kolb , & many others that we all thought we would be a better team if we would go after any of these guys ..

Go to ESPN & you can see the entire list top to bottom & it may surprise a lot of you that wanted us to go & get other QB's that were thought to be better than our own Fitz ...

#2 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    TBD's franchise poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,245 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:40 PM

We have fantasies of underperforming players suddenly exploding once they join the Bills.

By the way, CBS sports has Fitz with an 87.0 rating, ranked 15th.
http://m.cbssports.c...nsive&code=PRAT


PTR

http://m.espn.go.com...arterbackRating

So does ESPN.  Where did you get
48.1???

Edited by PromoTheRobot, 17 November 2012 - 02:37 PM.


#3 DanInUticaTampa

DanInUticaTampa

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,956 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:44 PM

I know Fitz is bad, but anything below 55 seems way to low, even for him.

#4 Boatdrinks

Boatdrinks

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:44 PM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 November 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

We have fantasies of underperforming players suddenly exploding once they join the Bills.

By the way, CBS sports has Fitz with an 87.0 rating, ranked 15th.
http://m.cbssports.c...nsive&code=PRAT


PTR

http://m.espn.go.com...arterbackRating

So does ESPN.  Where did you get
48.1???

The OP said "total QBR"  this is a different format of QB rating from the traditional formula. Not sure of all the minutiae, but it is supposed to be a more accurate indicator of a QB's actual performance.

#5 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,418 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:48 PM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 November 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

We have fantasies of underperforming players suddenly exploding once they join the Bills.

By the way, CBS sports has Fitz with an 87.0 rating, ranked 15th.
http://m.cbssports.c...nsive&code=PRAT


PTR

http://m.espn.go.com...arterbackRating

So does ESPN.  Where did you get
48.1???

It's espns new qbr, not the traditional. It allegedly takes into account situational stats better (weights the final 2 mins of tight games for instance, while washing garbage time plays out more)

Edited by NoSaint, 17 November 2012 - 02:48 PM.


#6 MDH

MDH

    My mind is going...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,601 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

View PostDanInUticaTampa, on 17 November 2012 - 02:44 PM, said:

I know Fitz is bad, but anything below 55 seems way to low, even for him.

It's not the QB rating you're thinking of, it's ESPNs new QBR stat which is pretty much crap if you ask me.

#7 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    TBD's franchise poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,245 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:01 PM

Here's the link: espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

Fitz is up to 49.1, still ranked #22. It should be noted that the best total QBR is 84.8.  So is this a realistic measure or just matches certain folks dark outlook?

PTR

Edited by PromoTheRobot, 17 November 2012 - 03:06 PM.


#8 Alphadawg7

Alphadawg7

    WATKINS!!!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,869 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:11 PM

QBR is massively better rating system than old QB rating system which literally had no way to measure a QB's real effectiveness.  In fact the original QB rating is not even a stat any scouts, coaches, or GMs used or paid any attention to and was pretty viewed as useless.  Which is why QBR was created and it actually has the ability to better rate the effectiveness of a QB.  Literally QB rating before was pointless and considered useless.

Edited by Alphadawg7, 17 November 2012 - 04:12 PM.


#9 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,418 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:17 PM

View PostPromoTheRobot, on 17 November 2012 - 03:01 PM, said:

Here's the link: espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

Fitz is up to 49.1, still ranked #22. It should be noted that the best total QBR is 84.8.  So is this a realistic measure or just matches certain folks dark outlook?

PTR

It's a new stat, so it's hard to totally wrap your head around it (don't have years of bench marking and experience with its strengths and short comings) but it seems to be among the more comprehensive and accurate numbers available for a rough idea of how your qb is doing vs peers. No stats perfect but it seems to be one of the better.

I think it confirms that fitz is a 3rd quartile type qb in any rankings I do. Below average but not in the basement. Having seen his résumé, his qbr seems to match my gut feelings.

Edited by NoSaint, 17 November 2012 - 04:18 PM.


#10 BillsWatch

BillsWatch

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,421 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

QBR does not take account of a lot of things - avoiding sacks, QB's ability to fake, blocking, etc.  Like every rating system is very crude and is more for those who are big on that.

#11 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,418 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:51 PM

View PostBillsWatch, on 17 November 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

QBR does not take account of a lot of things - avoiding sacks, QB's ability to fake, blocking, etc.  Like every rating system is very crude and is more for those who are big on that.

Would you argue fitz is much higher? It's certainly not perfect, but I'd say its atleast a decent bar room, napkin ranking

#12 BillsWatch

BillsWatch

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,421 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:09 PM

View PostNoSaint, on 17 November 2012 - 04:51 PM, said:

Would you argue fitz is much higher? It's certainly not perfect, but I'd say its atleast a decent bar room, napkin ranking

I would argue it is higher but no idea on scale since I can not watch much football now due to job requirements.  According to most QB ratings I have seen QB statues get rating far to highly because rating systems favor them.

#13 TheBackupQB

TheBackupQB

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 399 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:14 PM

Fitz is in the Middle of the Pack......truth is his QBR and whatever else would have been higher this year if the defense was better... No one thought he could carry a team...but he is good enough to win on offense... Just not good or great enough to win with the worst defense in the league

#14 Hopeful

Hopeful

    clearing the swamp

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,657 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:10 PM

View PostAlphadawg7, on 17 November 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

QBR is massively better rating system than old QB rating system which literally had no way to measure a QB's real effectiveness.  In fact the original QB rating is not even a stat any scouts, coaches, or GMs used or paid any attention to and was pretty viewed as useless.  Which is why QBR was created and it actually has the ability to better rate the effectiveness of a QB.  Literally QB rating before was pointless and considered useless.

I'm not quite ready to go there yet (either way).  I can see that they're making a strong attempt to assess effectiveness in scoring points/winning - I'm just not sure how well they've actually separated out QB performance

#15 Donald Duck

Donald Duck

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,706 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:28 PM

Now Fitz has grown accustomed to his change in mechanics I would be interested to see how much of an improvement Fitzpatrick makes from the 1st 6 games to the last 10 games of the season.

#16 JPS

JPS

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,723 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:18 PM

I have him rated at 4 and 6.  

Sub .500 where he has always been and will always be.

#17 Hater

Hater

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 600 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:43 PM

You don't need Numbers, watch him play thats all you need is to see how bad he is

#18 San Jose Bills Fan

San Jose Bills Fan

    San Jose Bills Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,764 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:47 PM

Two spitballs of information:

1) The official NFL stat is Passer Efficiency Rating or PER

2) ESPN's new metric was unveiled for this season and the jury is still out on this metric

#19 CardinalScotts

CardinalScotts

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,277 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 09:34 PM

wow espn haven't been there since NFL network started

#20 justnzane

justnzane

    MJ the "man" of many faces

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,041 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:44 PM

View PostSan Jose Bills Fan, on 17 November 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

Two spitballs of information:

1) The official NFL stat is Passer Efficiency Rating or PER

2) ESPN's new metric was unveiled for this season and the jury is still out on this metric
It was unveiled last season

A mark of 50.0 is considered average and 100 is perfect, but almost unattainable.