Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

Better than sixth: A rebuttal to PFF's placement of Tom Brady as the 6th best QB

 

In general, I have nothing but respect for what Pro Football Focus does. In terms of statistical dissemination, there is no better source at laying out information in an easy-to-organize fashion. I did not purchase Pro Football Focus this past year, but I am considering to do so for next season just because the kind of information that they disseminate is difficult to find elsewhere.

However, despite this positive impression of their statistics, I still had a major problem when I read their reasoning as to why Tom Brady should be ranked the 33rd best player, and the 6th best QB, in the 2010 NFL season. I understand the perspective that they are coming from, but in some cases they are simply incorrect in their rationalizations.

I will now compare Brady to all of the quarterbacks ranked above him in PFF’s rankings: Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan and Aaron Rodgers. Let us see if the assertion that Brady was the sixth best quarterback in football actually holds up when pressed to true statistical analysis.

Star-divide

 

PATRIOTS

1. The YAC Myth

One of the biggest reasons that PFF was so low on Tom Brady was because of the perception that he often has his receivers rack up yards after catch for him rather than sling passes deep. As the author of the article, Khaled Elsayed said:

"Nobody, especially not I, is saying Brady isn’t a better quarterback then all these men, or that if you asked me tomorrow to choose a quarterback to build a franchise around, it wouldn’t be Brady. What I am saying, though, is when the ball was snapped, Brady didn’t do as much as the other guys in making plays beyond what’s expected from the average quarterback."

Really? Let’s look at the average yards after catch number for each of the quarterbacks in questions (statistics courtesy of Football Outsiders.)

Brady – 5.5 yards after catch – 9th in NFL
Brees – 4.6 yards after catch – 34th in NFL
Manning – 4.2 yards after catch – 41st in NFL
Rivers – 6.3 yards after catch – 4th in NFL
Ryan – 3.8 yards after catch – 44th in NFL
Rodgers – 5.7 yards after catch – 6th in NFL

I’m perfectly fine with saying that Brady certainly benefits more from yards after the catch than, say, a Brees or Manning does (both of whom play in more vertical passing offenses.) However, to knock Brady due to his offensive scheme and then to laud Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers for transcending theirs is simply disengenuous. I personally do not think that any of them are bad quarterbacks; I think that the great ones are able to put their receivers into space and let them get yards after the catch on a regular basis rather than just bomb it down the field every single play. However, I still find it problematic to apply a certain set of standards to one player and then throw it out when looking at others. Brady certainly got some YAC last year, but it was not the be-all/end-all of his game, and he did not benefit from it as much as other top quarterbacks in the league did.

2. Dropped Interceptions

Another oft-levied accusation against Tom Brady is that, while he only gave up 4 interceptions on the year, many of his passes could have been picked off: they were dropped by opposing defenders due to luck. This is a viable thing to say: I, myself, remember that he nearly had a couple of balls returned the other way this past year. However, even with the dropped INTs, his numbers would not have been nearly as bad as for other top quarterbacks. Football Outsiders, once again, did a really interesting study where, through their game-charting project, they analyzed how many true dropped interceptions (not iffy balls, balls that hit defenders in the hands/chest and then bounced off) each quarterback had this past season. They also factored out Hail Mary interceptions and tipped INTs, as those were mainly due to bad luck for the quarterbacks. The results of the study were quite interesting.

Brady – 4 INTs – 1 HM + 3 drops = 6 INTs – 1.2 INT%
Manning – 17 INTs – 1 HM + 7 drops = 23 INTs – 3.5 INT%
Brees – 21 INT – 1 HM + 5 drops – 2 tips = 23 INTs – 3.6 INT%
Rivers – 12 INTs + 3 drops – 1 tip = 14 INTs – 2.6 INT%
Ryan – 9 INTs + 6 drops – 1 tip = 14 INTs – 2.5 INT%
Rodgers – 10 INTs – 1 HM + 5 drops = 14 INTs – 2.9 INT%

In summary, every single quarterback, even with dropped interceptions included, would still have had markedly higher interception percentages than Brady would have. Even Rodgers and Rivers, the two quarterbacks who benefitted more from yards after the catch than Brady this past year, had more dropped interceptions than Tom did. Brady was simply much more efficient, even though he did not benefit the most from yards after the catch. What he did, in any context, was exemplary.

3. The difficulty of defenses

Finally, Brady had to face more difficult defenses than any of his opponents this past season. We can analyze this by looking at his Defense Adjusted Yards Above Replacement subtracted with his unaltered Yards Above Replacement to see this discrepancy. Then, we can analyze the rest of the top quarterbacks.

Brady: 2137-1987 = 150 yard boost
Manning: 1679-1880 = -201 yard boost
Brees: 1360-1336 = 24 yard boost
Rivers: 1652-1853 = -201 yard boost
Ryan: 1348-1308 = 30 yard boost
Rodgers: 1514-1467 = 47 yard boost

We can also look at the Defense Value over Average as opposed to the Value over Average to see the effect of strong defenses on Brady’s numbers.

Brady: 53.3-48.8 = 4.5% difference
Manning: 25.0-29.4 = -4.4% difference
Brees: 19.3-18.8 = 0.5% difference
Rivers: 34-39.4 – -5.4% difference
Ryan: 23.9-22.9 = 1.0% difference
Rodgers: 33.6-32.2 = 1.4% difference

So, to recap, Tom Brady played defenses that were much more valuable than any of the other top competitors at the position. He beat his next closest competition, Aaron Rodgers, by over 100 yards. Is this a huge amount when extrapolated over the entire season? Possibly not, but it still does indicate the difficulty of defenses that Brady had to face, especially considering that two of his top competitors, Manning and Rivers, actually saw their altered numbers FALL due to the defenses that they played. Brady faced a tougher slate of defenses than any other quarterback this past season, and these two statistics make it quite clear.

Conclusion

So, to recap:

1. Tom Brady does get some benefit from YAC, but not as much as Philip Rivers or Aaron Rodgers did this past season.

2. Despite his interception numbers, even with drops tallied into the equation, Brady is still far and away the most efficient quarterback in the group of elites.

3. Brady faced the most difficult schedule this year BY FAR, and still put up the most efficient/best numbers.

What does this mean? To me, it seems like Brady, at the very least, has to be above Rivers and Manning, two quarterbacks who made a ton of mistakes this past year, one of whom got more help in terms of YAC than Brady did, and both of whom played exceedingly easy schedules. Brees was also extremely inefficient with the ball in his hands and played an easy schedule compared to his competition, so I would drop him as well. Matt Ryan had as many dropped interceptions this past season as Rodgers did, so he was clearly a bit less efficient than Brady although he played against weaker defenses. I think it is fair to drop him from contention.

That leaves Brady and Rodgers, and quite frankly, I can see the argument for Rodgers, at the very least, being above Brady. But, to be blunt, these two players should not be 30 spots apart on a list that was supposedly done by stats gurus. The numbers simply do not hold up when put under scrutiny.

I found it interesting that, in the aforementioned PFF article, no actual statistics were mentioned when ranking the players: the author referred to the subjective point system used by game charters. That is probably because no real statistics would have backed up their assertion. Tom Brady, by all statistical measures, was a top 2 quarterback in the NFL last year, and a very, very strong argument can be made that he was number one.

The views expressed in these FanPosts are not necessarily those of the writers or SBNation.

Comment 45 comments  |  11 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Brady should also have one tipped interception

the Moss int in game 2. Great work. Rec’d.

RIP Seve

by Cameron O on May 9, 2011 3:21 PM EDT reply actions  

I don't mind that one being counted against Brady...

He shouldn’t have been trying to jam it to Randy. Bleh. At least, not trying to jam it to the 2010 incarnation of Randy.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
Contributing Writer at PatsPulpit

by Comedic.Sans on May 10, 2011 6:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you put it on a receivers hands

their is nothing more a QB can do. Foolish, yes. TB’s fault, no. They’re system is about showing what was or was not a QB’s fault. That int was not the QB’s fault.

RIP Seve

by Cameron O on May 11, 2011 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Fantastic write up.

Loved reading the numbers of what I already suspected. Great job.

It matters not how strait the gate, nor charged with punishments the scroll:
I am the Master of my fate. I am the Captain of my soul.

by BigRussNovak on May 9, 2011 3:21 PM EDT reply actions  

The subjective point system is the problem.

Elsayed had a specific type of QB in mind – a younger Brett Favre or Steve Young-type player, I think – when making this system. It “rewards” throwing into double coverage, scrambling, throwing on the run and other high risk/high reward types of plays far more than it does the plays that a more methodical and precise passer would attempt/complete. Also, it ignores the fact that Brady is one of the very best at changing routes and coverages to avoid the exact situations – QB pressures and double-covered primary receivers – that garner points under this system.

As with any statistical analysis, when your methodology produces inexplicable outliers, you have to reevaluate. His system blatantly undervalues the kind of passer that Brady is – a meticulously cautious and supremely aware QB whose decision making and pass placement set the standard in the modern NFL. This sort of ranking, completely independent of statistics, could work, if its creator either knew more about the intricacies of the QB position or was better able to quantify them.

by nbradley07 on May 9, 2011 3:52 PM EDT reply actions  

The bigger problem

Is that the system they used isn’t statistically or mathematically based. That’s what really annoyed me when they tried to explain themselves. They basically said “Take our words for it, Brady wasn’t that good, the offense was better than he was.”

Follow me on Twitter @Ethanhamm!
Proud Patriots fan and draft analyst, no matter what Ted Thompson says.

by Ethan Hammerman on May 9, 2011 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

I like the idea of the play-based point system

I think it adds a layer to the analysis that most stats can’t capture. I think you’re right, though, that there has to be some sort of statistical grounding. If he came up with something akin to the “quality start” stat in baseball – only geared toward assigning a point value to each pass attempt based on type of pass, execution and outcome – it could have worked.

by nbradley07 on May 9, 2011 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Brady is incredible at doing one thing (the thing he might be the best ever in the NFL and the one thing he definitely does better than Manning)

not forcing the ball and not throwing interceptions. This system undervalues that, and there is a big problem. I like any statistical model that says Manning was better in 2010 than Brady, but I know that is not true, and I know for sure Matt Ryan wasn’t better.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 9, 2011 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks

The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
Some people can learn from the mistakes of others, while some people need to pee on the electric fence themselves.
Official Fire-Puncher for Pats Pulpit an SB Nation Blog

by SlotMachinePlayer on May 9, 2011 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Dear Tom,

Plz cut the hair.

Love,
Ninja.

Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.

by NinjaZX6R on May 9, 2011 7:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Love,
Ninja.

know that luck favors the prepared. - SMP

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

odd boy

Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.

by NinjaZX6R on May 9, 2011 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

No homo?

Maybe a little, if you’ve been drinking…

But anyway…

"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West

by insertscreenname on May 10, 2011 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

Odd Aussie.

Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.

by NinjaZX6R on May 10, 2011 2:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

the problem is using stats to be the be-all end-all in the discussion

it is so incredibly illogical. there are a couple people I want to paraphrase.
1. Marima on other threads said something like “if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck” and also said somewhere else “my thermometer can read 80 degrees but if there is snow on the ground.”
2. coldhardfootballfacts says that stats don’t lie, but the way that we interpret stats is where the problem is. coldhardfootallfacts attempts to discover which stats have the highest correlation to winning football games, the reason why the games are played.

Last season, Tom Brady definitely looked like the best quarterback. He definitely played like the best quarterback.
When it comes to the ranking system, he might be considered the 6th but when there is snow on the ground in Foxborough we all know who is coming to play.
As long as we interpret this guys’ rankings the right way, which is realizing that he is misguided, then we can move on without making much of a fuss.

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 4:14 PM EDT reply actions  

One huge problem with this analysis

it uses FootballOutsiders statistics to refute ProFootballFocus. That’s basically applying one subjective evaluation scheme to evaluate the problems with another one. I personally don’t think either do a great job of assessing individual players, but either way, despite what we feel are the merits of each, they are in the end subjective. Especially FO, which uses preseason projections to initially establish their schedule strength that is used as a baseline for the rest of the year.

I agree with you. Brady was definitely not the 6th best QB in 2010. Personally, he’s tied with Rivers, who was insane considering the random guys he was throwing to. That said, using one ranking that has him first to refute another ranking that has him 6th isn’t exactly a strong argument.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 9, 2011 4:17 PM EDT reply actions  

footballoutsiders uses DVOA and such

and a lot of their stuff is about deviations from other stats, not their interpretations of them. I’d liken them more to the passer rating formula than profootballfocus

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not really a fan of either in assessing offensive players

My point anyway wasn’t to put down the merits of either, just to say that trying to refute PFF’s work with FO’s doesn’t make sense, as its using one set of subjective criteria to assess another different set of subjective criteria.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 9, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

FO's stats are not nearly as subjective as PFF's in terms of THIS analysis

At least how it was portrayed in the article the PFF used to back up its decision. PFF used judgment calls by game charters as the backbone of their analysis. FO uses numbers in theirs.

Also, FO only uses preseason projections for the first four games of the season, then phases them out over time and replaces them with the actual statistics. Actually, only Game 1 uses the previous year’s full statistics, then it is diminished in each progressive week until by Week 4 it is completely phased out.

PFF is a little better for visualizing the entire gamut of statistics, but FO uses theirs in a more intelligent manner, if that makes sense. In terms of usage, FO blows PFF out of the water.

Follow me on Twitter @Ethanhamm!
Proud Patriots fan and draft analyst, no matter what Ted Thompson says.

by Ethan Hammerman on May 9, 2011 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

FO's whole base is thier subjective definition of what a "successful" play is

DVOA itself is based upon how many times a team has “successful” plays which are subjectively assigned. It might have a more concrete outline, but it is still subjective. PFF also has, as they claim, a 13 page outline of how to grade QBs. I’m sure its not nearly as loose as the grading system they outlined in their article.

FO also tries to judge how many yards a QB or RB is responsible for on a certain play (more often for RBs), and makes judgement decisions on a lot of bases, especially since they, I believe, don’t have access to coaches film.

It might be a better way of judging a QB, but that is debatable. What is also debatable is that it is a subjective system as well.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 9, 2011 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

at least FO weights their stuff

which is why DVOA is so appealing to me. Only problem is it doesn’t weight for strength of opponent, it weights comparing performance against the average against that opponent. Everyone knows Brady was the best last year by far. It makes no sense to even be having these discussions lol

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't disagree with that

But at the very least FO has a solid rubric for what defines a successful play and what does not. It’s based on yardage and percentage of yardage per play. It isn’t just someone sitting back and saying that this 5 yard play was a success and this other one wasn’t.

My main point is that FO’s statistics are, at the very least, mathematically grounded, while PFF’s simply are not, at least what they seemed to have used for this study. They used subjective scores of their own derivation with no statistical basis. That’s problematic to me.

Follow me on Twitter @Ethanhamm!
Proud Patriots fan and draft analyst, no matter what Ted Thompson says.

by Ethan Hammerman on May 9, 2011 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can see your point.

BTW, I totally agree with what you are saying in your post, the intentions of the argument. Brady definitely had a better year than what PFF ranked him at.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 9, 2011 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

He had a year

his ranking is perception, and that perception is biased based on the person. we take issue with it because the writer of those rankings is a hypocrite…well that’s why I do

know that luck favors the prepared. - SMP

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yay for discussion!

Yeah, that was basically my main issue with it. I love PFFs stats, I hate the rating system.

Follow me on Twitter @Ethanhamm!
Proud Patriots fan and draft analyst, no matter what Ted Thompson says.

by Ethan Hammerman on May 9, 2011 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'ts a teamsport. Just ask Brady

Only one starting quarterback won the superbowl last year (with his team), Rodgers, and only one will win it this year – Brady.

by Cromartie is a tool on May 9, 2011 5:14 PM EDT reply actions  

ahahahahahaha

know that luck favors the prepared. - SMP

by pats4life on May 9, 2011 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Pats get to play the Bills twice.

When’s the last time the Pats lost to the Bills? 2003?

by nbradley07 on May 9, 2011 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yea but the Bills have occasional talent and play outside

Detroit has a dome and is still recovering from a bad case of Matt Millen.

If you’ll excuse me I need to go to Buffalo Rumblings and tell them they got compared to Detroit and Carolina.. brb…

If knowledge is power and power corrupts...

by satsunada on May 9, 2011 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

They were decent.

And were FAR more competitive than any of Misbegotten Mariucci’s teams in Detroit. Finishing with 370 points given up to 362 points on offense (or somesuch), despite having Matt Stafford injured for most of the season? Outscoring the champs (Detroit had 33 points to Green Bay’s 31 when you add up their scores in their games)?

For the most part, Detroit was able to keep it close. Only New England truly blew them out last year.

Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on May 9, 2011 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

and even that was 24-24 entering the 4th quarter

They were a lot better, and are, imo, wild card ready in 2011, if not 2012.

EVH+DLR=BFFs........ God I Hope So!!

by dmstorm22 on May 10, 2011 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Completely agreed

Doesn’t mean the stigma has fully left the building.

Either way, I could say the same about most of the ‘elite’ QB’s. They each got to play against crap teams in-conference. Brady gets the Bills, Ryan got the Panthers, Rodgers got Minnesota/Detroit, Manning gets the Jags, and Rivers has the rest of the AFC West :P

If knowledge is power and power corrupts...

by satsunada on May 10, 2011 1:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't rag on Detroit too badly, especially that D-line...

Suh and co. made mincemeat of the Pats O-line in the first half. It was only when they got tired and the Pats started using TEs to chip them that the Pats moving, and even then it spun on McCourty’s D.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
Contributing Writer at PatsPulpit

by Comedic.Sans on May 10, 2011 6:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

They still have alot of rebuilding to do

Their D line was great. Their secondary and O-line look rough at best. They have almost nothing outside Megatron at receiver (not counting TE, Pettigrew looks solid). If they can keep people healthy, they aren’t a bad team but they still need a few more pieces. I’m just not sure the owners are willing to take steps to fix things yet for the long term. They remind me of the owners of the Cardinals too much.

If knowledge is power and power corrupts...

by satsunada on May 10, 2011 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Haha

Yeah, that ranking was a bit questionable, though Ryan wasn’t BAD last year. He just wasn’t Brady.

Follow me on Twitter @Ethanhamm!
Proud Patriots fan and draft analyst, no matter what Ted Thompson says.

by Ethan Hammerman on May 10, 2011 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't understand the stigma against YAC

It’s worth considering, but isn’t the whole point to throw the ball where the receiver can catch and run? Then when you do that successfully it’s a sign of being worse than Matt Ryan?

And that makes sense how?

Hey, You're not dressed for an afternoon of Tchaikovsky and heavy petting!

by No Pity on May 17, 2011 5:21 PM EDT reply actions  

Did you see the scoring method?

You got bonus points for throwing into double coverage or almost getting sacked before tossing the wildly errant pass. So Derek Anderson, Matt Stafford and Matt Cassell in the Ravens playoff game scored HUGE.

If knowledge is power and power corrupts...

by satsunada on May 18, 2011 5:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

Lol

I didn’t notice that.

Hopefully Brady learns from his mistakes and starts watching some game film of those guys. We need a real qb if we want to win the SB again ;)

Hey, You're not dressed for an afternoon of Tchaikovsky and heavy petting!

by No Pity on May 22, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

The teams that led the league in YAC in 09, for the most part, weren't in the playoffs.

That’s because teams start to expect the YAC out of their WRS, but disciplined Ds will not allow YAC.

-Pulse of the Maggots P.o.t.M. The "pm striker king"- WZB
"3 sentences that will fix your relationship problems: You're right. I'm wrong. I'm sorry." - One of the things you learn in Physics class
Behind every great man is a good woman; behind every good woman is a man looking at her @$$.
"Loving a good woman is the best thing a man can do for his moral welfare" -Narrator from The AutoBiography of an Ex-colored Man
Go see Mosul's new blog! An Observation on Sports

by PotM on Jun 3, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A New England Patriots Blog

Media requests: Please email patspulpit at gmail.com


Managing Editor

Patriot_small Greg Knopping

Assistant Editor

Belichick_2_small Marima

Headshotoj_small Richard Hill

Dscn0127_small Jared Stegall

Contributing Writers

Photo_small Austin Martin

Small Stephen Verman

Bill-belichick_small Ashto12

Peter-heisman_small Alec Shane

Moderators

Kiwi_small Comedic.Sans

A-clockwork-orange-alex_small Jack'sAxe