Quick and dirty averages for 2023 season using QBs who qualify for CMP% on Profootball reference.

CMP% 65.4

YDS 228.3

TD/G 1.3

INT/G 0.76

Y/A 7.05

Rate: 89.3

Sack 2.47

Also feel like here I should mention his earliest game for the last data point in the original post dates back 10/13/2022 against Washington, which is only his 15th game, so there is about a 3 game overlap for the first and last data point. Part of the reason I decided to re-do this with the 8-game running average as well in my other comment

Decided to do an 8 game running average as well and plotted everything on its own graph. More noise, but with only 31 games I think it makes more sense

https://imgur.com/a/BNvMS5P

Youre the one who demanded nuance but refused to acknowledge there’s nuance to what criteria people use to give out (personal) book ratings.

Unless you create a standardized criteria it’s all just based on what the reader wanted and how well the author delivered on expectations

Is nuance not a thing? Can I not rate a book that fulfillls its function perfectly as 5 even if it’s prose quality isn’t as good as a 20th century classic that fulfills its own function perfectly? Can I not rate 2 separate books a 5 out of 5 for completely different reasons?

Feel like it depends on why you’re rating one of those books 5 stars. I would rate a book I enjoyed a lot 5 stars if it scratched the itch I had, and that itch can vary. Obviously rating it 5 stars based on literary value is a no, but not everyone rates based on that.

Pick up his 5th year option, it’s not that much. That gives you 2 more years to develop and evaluate and 2 years to take your time finding a coach/OC you trust and building the team to an acceptable level for a rookie QB.

IMO one of the biggest mistakes the Browns and Jets make is being in on the QB carousel every 1-3 years and investing too much draft capital there over the rest of the team.

It starts at the top.

GM has to be secure enough to take the 3-4 year approach. Coach has to be feel he’ll be fairly evaluated on his skills, not the W/L record with a bad team. Then you build the roster and bring in a QB when you have a team to support them.

That is laughable. Based on your exact description of their methodology there is only 1 reviewer and if they disagree it’s more of an arbitration between the original two scores than a review.

Peer reviewed journals publish many pages worth of data supporting their findings. Which is reviewed and critiqued by peers, often requiring additional experiments. Results are more often than not quantitative and if you approach a journal with qualitative data only it better be rock solid or the reviewers will have a field day.

PFF is purely qualitative data that is pseudo-quantified. Reporting their methods doesn’t make their methods good (this is true in peer reviewed journals as well).

Any time you take a qualitative source data and attempt to quantify it, the data should be questioned. Pseudo-quantification is good as a supporting measurement, but if it’s your primary measurement for your conclusion then you’re in trouble. Just own it as qualititative and you’ll get more respect.

How much cross reference does PFF do to make sure scores are consistent. I.e. do the same 3 people score all the OL in every game or is one guy assigned to each team, grading that team and the opposing team each week. Do they publish results of bias studies on their graders? Are some graders tougher on some teams than others? Or on some players than others (i.e. position, star status, race/ethnicity, etc)

The data is fine for fans who have no idea how to judge a player within a given season, but it is severely lacking in many aspects

Bears have most cap space in the league, they’d be happy to slap 2 franchise/transition tags on him (depending on who else needs a tag… Such as JJ), and then let him go after he reaches his age 30 season or at the first sign of injury trouble

People have a skewed perception of “an average NFL QB” because guys like Brady, Manning, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, Big Ben have such long playing careers. We’re talking guys who were drafted in late 90s to mid 00s playing well into mid 10s and early 20s

The reality is that an average starting NFL QB isn’t QB16 in any given year, it’s the average of all starting QBs over the past decade.

QBs who “bust” and don’t get another starting contract or bounce around are closer to average than most people are willing to give them credit for.

Yup cause we totally have seen the best processors drafted first overall and not the most physically gifted and mechanically sound guys year in and year out. /s

S2 test is like the only quantitative way to look at his processing ability and every non-quantitative method comes with the caveat of playing against D2 athletes.

Idk that bagent will be any good at all, but reality is we don’t know shit about him other than he out played Peterman for the backup role