2015 DQR and Quarterback Play/Efficiency Numbers

[deljzc]

I have completed my use of statistics of each quarterback/team and run them through my "Deljzc Quarterback Rating" formula, which I think is a vast improvement over the tradition quarterback rating AND superior to ESPN's rating since my is completely numbers based (you can fill in the formula using any statistical gamebook of an NFL game).

To start off, Roethlisberger was the 3rd highest rated quarterback using my formula in the NFL last season. The Steelers team was ranked 7th highest as reflected by poor quarterback play/efficiency in the 5 games Roethlisberger missed due to injury.

Individually, here are the best performers with significant snaps to qualify:

Carson Palmer - 112.2
Andy Dalton - 111.1
Ben Roethlisberger - 107.3
Drew Brees - 105.5
Russel Wilson - 104.4
Tom Brady - 102.5
Kirk Cousins - 99.5
Tyrod Taylor - 96.5
Cam Newton - 95.2
Alex Smith - 93.3

The quarterbacks in this top-10 list had a 102-47 record in games they started (only Brees was under .500 at 7-8). These 10 teams also ranked highest (in slightly different order) depending on injury and backup performances.

The bottom 10 teams in the NFL largely ended up using multiple quarterbacks based on injury, inconsistency or both.

Jacksonville (Bortles only) - 79.7
Tennessee - 78.9
Baltimore - 78.7
Houston - 74.3
San Francisco - 73.3
Dallas - 71.2
Denver -- 71.1
Cleveland - 69.2
St. Louis - 68.1
Indianapolis - 67.7

Obviously, the anomaly here is Denver, but they bucked the trend getting to a 12-4 record against not only this measure but historical measures such as turnover margin (-4), scoring margin (3.7 ppg - 10th) and many others.

Still, even with Denver's 12-4 record, the bottom 10 teams above combined for 61 wins and 99 losses and include teams picking 6 of the first 7 selection come draft day.

As for the "middle 12", it is unique this year that those quarterbacks started an amazing 189 out of 192 games with only Bradford (missed two games) and Cutler (missed 1 game) of the entire group. And likewise this group, while having consistent health at the position, also had inconsistent results. The "middle 12" quarterbacks combined for a starting record of 88 wins vs. 101 losses. And many of these quarterbacks have been in the "top 10" in previous seasons when talent/coaching/health/luck help their cause rather than hurt it for whatever reason.

J. Cutler - 91.5
E. Manning - 88.9
P. Rivers - 88.7
M. Stafford - 88.1
M. Ryan - 87.9
J. Winston - 87.2
R. Fitzpatrick - 87.0
D. Carr - 84.6
T. Bridgewater - 84.4
A. Rodgers - 82.6
S. Bradford - 82.4
R. Tannehill - 81.4

 

[deljzc]

As a reminder on the basis of the numbers:

The "old" quarterback rating system is only based on 4 statistics, each of which is equally weighted: Comp %, TD%, INT% and YPA

I have changed this to reflect FIVE statistics and weighted them slightly different to each other to reflect importance (in my humble opinion):

1. Completion %
2. Points per Possession by offense while Quarterback is in charge
3. Turnovers (INT + FL) per Drop Back/Quarterback Play (to includes pass attempts, designed rushes and scrambles - no kneel downs or quarterback sneaks)
4. Yards (pass yards + rushing yards) per Drop Back/Quarterback Play (to include pass attemps/yards and designed rushes/yards and scramble attempts/yards - no kneel downs or QB sneaks).
5. A "risk factor" that evaluates the +/- of Big Plays (20+ yards either run or pass) vs. the times the QB is sacked. This +/- number is than compared to total pass plays and evaluated vs. the league average. The category is approximately weighted HALF as much as the others.

The league average DQR is approximately 84.0

The highest DQR measured for a season was Aaron Rodgers in 2011 (around 125.0).

 

[Troglodyte]

You've got a lot of time on your hands.

 

[Stryker]

This is why I love Del. Thanks for the work. Fun read!

 

[Coach]

The bottom 10 teams in the NFL largely ended up using multiple quarterbacks based on injury, inconsistency or both.

Jacksonville (Bortles only) - 79.7
Tennessee - 78.9
Baltimore - 78.7
Houston - 74.3
San Francisco - 73.3
Dallas - 71.2
Denver -- 71.1
Cleveland - 69.2
St. Louis - 68.1
Indianapolis - 67.7

Many of the bottom 10 qb's teams pick high in the draft, except for Denver who might have won the super bowl with Tebow at quarterback.

 

[SteelerSask2]

Carolina possibly had the worst game plan in the history of big games. They needed to make the whole thing about Manning beating them. There was no such thing as a bad punt in that game. They just couldn't turn the ball over in the spots that they did. Just brutal. Third and long inside your own 20. Run and punt. i think they were trying to make Cam into the next great SB QB when they should have lived with Roethlisberger in '05

 

[steelerscotty]

Interesting system. Good work. Any plan that ends up with Dalton as the number 2 QB is seriously flawed though, lol. How about adding a "choke factor" rating?

 

[scstillerfan]

Nice work as always Del. I wouldn't argue the results.

 

[Drink IRON City]

Thank you for all your work and time into this, Deljzk. I ONLY have one major concern of skewinism...... How in the hell could Joe Flacco, the MOST elite QB ever, end up in the bottom ten. Didn't you take his high salary and good looks into account????? WTF




Salute the nation

 

[Litos]

Good info as usual Del, are you scouting draft prospects this season? Very informative read for sure .
If not, how about scouting the DBs that the Steelers possibly target?

 

[deljzc]

Good info as usual Del, are you scouting draft prospects this season? Very informative read for sure .
If not, how about scouting the DBs that the Steelers possibly target?

I'm not. I think I'm going cold turkey too. If I scout one player, turns into five, turns into 20, turns into 200....

I've watched some film (like when we debated that TE Hunter Henry).

And there was another thread on quarterbacks and I watched film of Paxton Lynch (who I don't like) because I was curious.

I told everyone.... I'm not into football anymore like I was. I didn't miss it like I thought I would. It was easier to schedule family stuff on the weekends around me watching a 2-hour soccer game on Saturday morning than using up my whole Sunday around a 1:00PM game that lasts 3 1/2 or 4 hours. Maybe I'm a hypocrite, maybe not, but the whole Vick thing left a very bad taste in my mouth about this teams leadership, decisions and organization. And I don't like the NFL leadership much either (and I think Rooney is bigger part of that than people want to admit). And the concussion thing is still a black cloud either way far in the distance or right in the next county depending on your position (but it's still there).

I'm still a fan, just not fanatical.

I'm still interested in the numbers. I still am following the trends of the team and I like to analyze their off-season team building. I still think NFL football team building and off-seasons are the best (by far) of any sport because so much of the resources available between teams is equal and open for fans to see.

If you want my opinion on a prospect, I'll scout him for you. Like I would normally, but I doubt I can rank him as compared to the whole draft class because that would mean watching lots of players and I just don't have the desire to do that this year.

 

[Coach]

Interesting system. Good work. Any plan that ends up with Dalton as the number 2 QB is seriously flawed though, lol. How about adding a "choke factor" rating?

It's not in my nature to praise division rivals, but Dalton this year was in contention for MVP honors. He played like a top QB, better than some famous QB's like that guy in Green Bay.

Another observation, which I think is key is a Franchise might as well kick itself in the nuts by giving the "middle 12" deals close to franchise type of QB's. They over pay, kill their cap, and committed the franchise to mediocrity.

 

[Litos]

I'm not. I think I'm going cold turkey too. If I scout one player, turns into five, turns into 20, turns into 200....

I've watched some film (like when we debated that TE Hunter Henry).

And there was another thread on quarterbacks and I watched film of Paxton Lynch (who I don't like) because I was curious.

I told everyone.... I'm not into football anymore like I was. I didn't miss it like I thought I would. It was easier to schedule family stuff on the weekends around me watching a 2-hour soccer game on Saturday morning than using up my whole Sunday around a 1:00PM game that lasts 3 1/2 or 4 hours. Maybe I'm a hypocrite, maybe not, but the whole Vick thing left a very bad taste in my mouth about this teams leadership, decisions and organization. And I don't like the NFL leadership much either (and I think Rooney is bigger part of that than people want to admit). And the concussion thing is still a black cloud either way far in the distance or right in the next county depending on your position (but it's still there).

I'm still a fan, just not fanatical.

I'm still interested in the numbers. I still am following the trends of the team and I like to analyze their off-season team building. I still think NFL football team building and off-seasons are the best (by far) of any sport because so much of the resources available between teams is equal and open for fans to see.

If you want my opinion on a prospect, I'll scout him for you. Like I would normally, but I doubt I can rank him as compared to the whole draft class because that would mean watching lots of players and I just don't have the desire to do that this year.

that's fair. I guess the names more heard for the Steelers are Jackson, Alexander, Apple (who I think is too raw to be a 1st round pick), I doubt Hargreaves would last that long

 

[21STEELERS21]

The only stat that matters is winning Super Bowls

 

[deljzc]

Winning Super Bowls takes a good football TEAM and luck. Any time you play a sport that plays one-and-done playoff system, it takes some luck. All you do as a team is geared toward increases the odds of winning.

And when you evaluate your "team" you always start with the forest and work towards the trees. The forest in this case is Offense and Defense. The trees are each individual player. Sometimes I think coaches concentrate too much on the trees and not the forest but we'll get to that.

When it comes to offense/defense generalities I have grown to think the following statistics are the bible:

1. Run/pass ratio and yards per play on FIRST DOWN
2. Football Outsiders DVOA
3. Drive Success Rate (more so than 3rd down conversion)
4. Red Zone Efficiency
5. Points per Possession

Now if I was doing this for a living, I would probably chart the first 4 and develop some sort of correlation for the last statistic (which is kind of the ultimate goal of offense). If your first 4 numbers aren't leading to the correct expected points per possession, you have to investigate why.

Note I do not bother measuring turnovers. I am not a fan of thinking turnovers is "coachable" or "changable". Fumbles are an individual player evaluation statistic and must be rooted out later in the process (and fumbles lost are irrelevant vs. fumbles). Interceptions are also somewhat an individual evaluation statistic (but a little more complex) but can be rooted out when we evaluate our passing game.

Now obviously, both the running game and passing game are TOOLS to be used in getting the above offensive "big picture" success but history has shown you don't actually need BOTH to do it and arguably one is not necessarily more important than the other.

When evaluating the run game the statistics I use:

1. First down run yards per carry.
2. Run play success rate
3. Stuffed percentage


Ideally, you would also use Football Outsider's tool of "Adjusted Yards per Carry" on first down. This method concentrates on what happens in the 5-yard window each way of the line of scrimmage and kind of ignores long runs and what happens at the "2nd level". We are basically trying to evaluate what is happening in the first 2 seconds of a run play and whether our run game is winning or losing in these situations (and at what percentage).

The passing game can be much more complex (sometimes overly so). You can see in my quarterback evaluation some statistics I think are worthwhile:

1. Completion %
2. Yards generator per pass play
3. Big Plays vs. Sacks evaluation
4. Turnovers per pass play

You can expand these statistics a lot by situation, target, area of the field, etc. but for the most part this will paint a relatively accurate representation of your pass game and its strengths and weaknesses.

In all honesty, if you concentrate on these statistics and investigate why any is weak or failing and implement incremental changes to improve it (while making sure not to weaken something else), you will succeed.

What makes football so hard for some is not properly evaluating why a certain statistic is failing: raw talent, talent/scheme fit, player availability/committment, teaching, or game day coaching.

Every failure/weakness must be evaluated correctly to determine what is the root cause.

 

[deljzc]

that's fair. I guess the names more heard for the Steelers are Jackson, Alexander, Apple (who I think is too raw to be a 1st round pick), I doubt Hargreaves would last that long

I will watch and write some notes on those four players sometime in the next couple of days.

 

[Clete]

Tombert showed better quickness,speed and agility galloping up.to the podium to pick the bum with 14 minutes left on the clock than he has in his entire career.

 

[deljzc]

It's not in my nature to praise division rivals, but Dalton this year was in contention for MVP honors. He played like a top QB, better than some famous QB's like that guy in Green Bay.

Another observation, which I think is key is a Franchise might as well kick itself in the nuts by giving the "middle 12" deals close to franchise type of QB's. They over pay, kill their cap, and committed the franchise to mediocrity.

The problem is the "middle 12" don't always stay that way. Aaron Rogers certainly isn't a "middle 12" quarterback.

Two years ago, Rivers had one of the most productive seasons around (109.8 DQR and played all 16 games). In 2011-2012, Eli Manning and the Giants offense was clearly superior to what Roethlisberger and the Steelers were doing. Even Joe Flacco, who I am critical of, had the Ravens looking like they were going in the right direction in 2014 when the team had 2.20 points per possession and had only 12 turnovers and 19 sacks over the whole season. And these are players that never get hurt and have shown consistent health.

There is no "perfect quarterback" that can fix everything on your offense. Even having Aaron Rogers didn't help Green Bay this past season with everything that went wrong.

For most teams, you have to ask how much "help" the quarterback can provide on his own and still work to build solid groups around him: a consistent running game (back/offensive line), good pass protection, good 7-on-7 passing game (i.e. the timing plays), and a receiving core that can sometimes makes something out of nothing.

And when there are only 20 guys like that around that can stay healthy and sometimes lead a great offense, they get paid. A lot. Because the alternative is guys that likely will NEVER lead a consistent and efficient offense. The bottom 10. And no team wants to be stuck down there. That's no man's land.

 

[Coach]

The problem is the "middle 12" don't always stay that way. Aaron Rogers certainly isn't a "middle 12" quarterback.

Two years ago, Rivers had one of the most productive seasons around (109.8 DQR and played all 16 games). In 2011-2012, Eli Manning and the Giants offense was clearly superior to what Roethlisberger and the Steelers were doing. Even Joe Flacco, who I am critical of, had the Ravens looking like they were going in the right direction in 2014 when the team had 2.20 points per possession and had only 12 turnovers and 19 sacks over the whole season. And these are players that never get hurt and have shown consistent health.

There is no "perfect quarterback" that can fix everything on your offense. Even having Aaron Rogers didn't help Green Bay this past season with everything that went wrong.

For most teams, you have to ask how much "help" the quarterback can provide on his own and still work to build solid groups around him: a consistent running game (back/offensive line), good pass protection, good 7-on-7 passing game (i.e. the timing plays), and a receiving core that can sometimes makes something out of nothing.

And when there are only 20 guys like that around that can stay healthy and sometimes lead a great offense, they get paid. A lot. Because the alternative is guys that likely will NEVER lead a consistent and efficient offense. The bottom 10. And no team wants to be stuck down there. That's no man's land.

Rodgers had a tought year. His best WR ( Nelson got hurt ). He lost his Tackle, and Eddie Lacy was over weight. I expect him to bounce back.

Regarding the middle 12 QB's you shoudl be able to identify them. They really do not make their team better. If you give them 15+ million or more a year, your franshcie isn't goign anywhere. Rivers to me is a top 12 QB, stuck on a punchless offensive team. He's very good. I'm happy he was not traded to Denver or Houston.

 

[deljzc]

Rodgers had a tought year. His best WR ( Nelson got hurt ). He lost his Tackle, and Eddie Lacy was over weight. I expect him to bounce back.

Regarding the middle 12 QB's you shoudl be able to identify them. They really do not make their team better. If you give them 15+ million or more a year, your franshcie isn't goign anywhere. Rivers to me is a top 12 QB, stuck on a punchless offensive team. He's very good. I'm happy he was not traded to Denver or Houston.

I think you underestimate the cost teams are willing to spend NOT to be a bottom 10 team at that position.

You can't think just top-10 QB's anymore are worth it. It's really top-20 and the cost difference between the top-10 and top-20 is never realized because top-10 quarterback never become available. Teams just keep them forever.

You might disagree, but that's what it is. Teams are so afraid of getting into the "nothing" because that has traditional meant losing jobs, firing coaches and potentially getting into a cycle of regime changes every 3 seasons. To avoid that it might be worth paying a "good" quarterback $20 million/season just for stability at the position. Even with flaws, it's better to have something than nothing. Good coaches can work around known "flaws". They can't work around just plain bad or inexperience.

 

[Coach]

I think you underestimate the cost teams are willing to spend NOT to be a bottom 10 team at that position.

You can't think just top-10 QB's anymore are worth it. It's really top-20 and the cost difference between the top-10 and top-20 is never realized because top-10 quarterback never become available. Teams just keep them forever.

You might disagree, but that's what it is. Teams are so afraid of getting into the "nothing" because that has traditional meant losing jobs, firing coaches and potentially getting into a cycle of regime changes every 3 seasons. To avoid that it might be worth paying a "good" quarterback $20 million/season just for stability at the position. Even with flaws, it's better to have something than nothing. Good coaches can work around known "flaws". They can't work around just plain bad or inexperience.

The follwing QB's are not worth their contracts, and seldom make the playoffs. I think the guys in Red should not take up as much cap space as they do, and would let them walk and pick up a new QB in the draft or free agency for a much cheaper amount and spend the money elsewhere.


J. Cutler - 91.5
E. Manning - 88.9
P. Rivers - 88.7
M. Stafford - 88.1
M. Ryan - 87.9
J. Winston - 87.2 -Signed cheap for now
R. Fitzpatrick - 87.0 - If the Jets pay him 16+ million a year, they are making a big mistake.
D. Carr - 84.6
T. Bridgewater - 84.4 - Signed cheap for now
A. Rodgers - 82.6 - I consder him a top 5 NFL QB.
S. Bradford - 82.4
R. Tannehill - 81.4

 

[deljzc]

that's fair. I guess the names more heard for the Steelers are Jackson, Alexander, Apple (who I think is too raw to be a 1st round pick), I doubt Hargreaves would last that long

I watched a few games on each of these guys and here is what I came up with. This is WITHOUT knowing how they ran at the combine.

Vernon Hargreaves III
A bit short on film but displays plenty of toughness and physicality. Clearly an NFL athlete and shows very good change of direction and body control. Confident. Not a typical college boundary corner and played consistently at LCB. Very good zone defender and understands spacing and can make plays on ball. Should be okay tackler and not afraid of contact (Tenn game was horrible however). Should be immediate starter/top-3 corner on a team from day one. Not sure about pure man-2-man skills and don’t think that will be his roll in the NFL at this point, but if he tests well athletically/speed could develop into a shut down corner with commitment to detail, but is not there yet and I would not expect that of him.

Mackensie Alexander
Adequate size and long arms for position and plays predominantly man-2-man concepts. Can get a little clutchy/grabby and needs to watch contact downfield - could be learning curve on that in NFL. Is a younger player and evaluation is a lot of projection based on size/speed/athleticism - not a finished product. Is still very sloppy with this footwork and needs commitment to the craft. Very boom/bust prospect in my opinion. Is not a round 1 prospect unless he has exceptional physical test scores (4.3 speed, etc.). Tape says round 2-3.

William Jackson
True senior with lots of starts and thus looks much more polished and “old” as compared to other prospect. Smooth athlete with nice height/length on film but check change of direction numbers. He’s not as quick-twitch as you might like. Is a nice solid prospect, but nothing on film makes me go “wow” yet.

Eli Apple
Lots of flaws on tape, but the talent is tempting. Flashes NFL man-2-man ability but lacks all the polish you need at the next level. Is a bit weak right now (redshirt sophomore) and needs to grow into frame. Is not good at run support and get lose push/pull battles for the ball with quality receivers. Is a superior athlete that was probably highly recruited and has ideal height/length/speed/COD for the position. Another boom/bust prospect that has to take to coaching and self-improvement to live up to capabilities. Will not be able to skate by on raw ability anymore.