The (un)official OS QB Vision Cone Screenshot Thread

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by penguit

The fact that he's probably the worst passing QB (starter) in the game today. He has some of the worst field vision, when passing, I've ever seen.

Really? Worse than:

Boller
McCown
Ramsey
Collins
Bledsoe
Palmer
Harrington
Rattay
Warner
E. Manning

I watched some of every Atl game last year, and Vick seemed to improve greatly from prior years in terms of reading defenses. I saw him hit 2nd & 3rd options quite often. I would say he's still inconsistent and relies on Crumpler too often, but he's far from the worst passing starting QB in the league. His performance seemed typical of a talented QB after 2 years of playing.

[seanmac]

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

Worse than-

Boller- Yep
McCown- Yep
Ramsey- Yep
Collins- Yep
Bledsoe- Yep
Palmer- Yep
Harrington- Yep
Rattay- Yep
Warner- Yep
E. Manning- Yep

In terms of passing, the only quarterbacks with worse performances than Vick last year were Jonathan Quinn, Luke McCown, Jay Fiedler, Chad Hutchinson and Craig Krentzel (note the Bears theme).

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by seanmac

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php Worse than- Boller- Yep McCown- Yep Ramsey- Yep Collins- Yep Bledsoe- Yep Palmer- Yep Harrington- Yep Rattay- Yep Warner- Yep E. Manning- Yep In terms of passing, the only quarterbacks with worse performances than Vick last year were Jonathan Quinn, Luke McCown, Jay Fiedler, Chad Hutchinson and Craig Krentzel (note the Bears theme).

Maybe we're judging this differently. What are you basing your opinion on? What are you actually calling a performance?

Edit: I took a look at that link. Those formulas seem like a lot of nonsense to me. That's worse than passer ratings. And realize that those stats are through 2003, at which time Vick played a season and 1/2 worth of games. But if you're basing this on DPAR & PAR(what ever that's worth), than yes, Vick is the worst in the league. But I was hoping you were basing your opinion on what you saw, not a formula that someone created.

I'm basing my opinion partly on passer ratings, passing yards, accuracy, and completion percentage. But, primarily, my opinion is based on watching him read defenses and make decisions. And he did that better then most of the QBs on that list. And I'll add Feeley to the list as well.

[faster]

IN TERMS OF PASSING THE FOOTBALL, MICHAEL VICK IS AMONG THE WORST IN THE LEAGUE.

Period. He can't see the field, he doesn't checkdown, he doesn't give himself enough time to read a play because of hit feet, and he hasn't learned the system (that he should have). He is not a passing QB and can not CONSISTENTLY lead a drive with his arm. If you need 8-15 yards by the air, Vick will not do that for you because he just hasn't developed that skill.

Woah woah, he did all those things better than most other QBs????? That's why he completes a very low percentage of passes for VERY low yards? That's why he throws a very low amount of TDs?

Michael Vick is a horrible passing QB, end of story. Argue that Marino was a good running QB while you're at it. Granted, stats can only show so much of the picture, but they do tell some story.

[seanmac]

Quote: Originally Posted by BezO

Maybe we're judging this differently. What are you basing your opinion on? What are you actually calling a performance? Edit: I took a look at that link. Those formulas seem like a lot of nonsense to me. That's worse than passer ratings. And realize that those stats are through 2003, at which time Vick played a season and 1/2 worth of games. But if you're basing this on DPAR & PAR(what ever that's worth), than yes, Vick is the worst in the league. But I was hoping you were basing your opinion on what you saw, not a formula that someone created. I'm basing my opinion partly on passer ratings, passing yards, accuracy, and completion percentage. But, primarily, my opinion is based on watching him read defenses and make decisions. And he did that better then most of the QBs on that list. And I'll add Feeley to the list as well.

Actually, those ratings are fantastic and do a much better job of capturing the quality of performance at the position than any conventional rating. And it would help if you were reading them correctly- those stats are broken down by year, and the link I showed you was strictly for last season, with links provided for previous seasons.

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by penguit

IN TERMS OF PASSING THE FOOTBALL, MICHAEL VICK IS AMONG THE WORST IN THE LEAGUE.

Is that you yelling? C'mon. We're doing good.

Quote:

He can't see the field, he doesn't checkdown, he doesn't give himself enough time to read a play because of hit feet, and he hasn't learned the system (that he should have). He is not a passing QB and can not CONSISTENTLY lead a drive with his arm. If you need 8-15 yards by the air, Vick will not do that for you because he just hasn't developed that skill.

Then I'll have to agree to disagree. Like I said, I watched parts of all Atl games last year and noticed that he gives himself way more time to throw than he did in the past. Many times I saw him hit the 2nd & 3rd option. And the overwhelming majority of the time he is looking for 2nd & 3rd options before running.

As far as learning the system; he didn't play his first year, he had a good first year playing during his second season, and he had a different system his 3rd year which he only played 4 games. Then Atl switched to the West Coast offense last year, which is one of the toughest offenses to learn according to NFL coaches.

His feet are 2 of the most lethal weapons in the league. I won't penalize him for using them. But he's lead plenty of drives with primarily his arm. And he has plenty of 8-15 yard passes. He averages almost 13 yards per completion.

His coaches have to use his athletic ability. Add to that the times he will ad lib and realize that he will probably never be near the top of the league in attempts. Don't mistake his ability and eagerness to run for an inability to pass. At this point in his career, his athletic ability is ahead of his passing ability, but not because his passing ability is bad.

Quote:

Woah woah, he did all those things better than most other QBs????? That's why he completes a very low percentage of passes for VERY low yards? That's why he throws a very low amount of TDs? Michael Vick is a horrible passing QB, end of story. Argue that Marino was a good running QB while you're at it.

Most QBs on the list, not most QBs.

His percentage was better than Boller, Collins, Manning, and Harrington.

He was 2nd to Warner in yards per attempt. So yes, his total passing yards is low, but it's due to the number of attempts, not his lack of ability to get the ball down the field. In fact, since his percentage is lower than 6 of the QBs listed, his yards per completion must be far better than all of these QBs. He was 5th among these QBs in 20+ yard completions, and he's tied for 2nd in 40+ yard completions. But he was 7th among them in attempts. This all seems to indicate that he gets the ball down the field the best among them.

Quote:

Granted, stats can only show so much of the picture, but they do tell some story.

But the formulas that were used in that link didn't seem to mean much. I think the simpler stats are a better barometer, like yards, percentage, TD/Ints, ect.

[seanmac]

Quote: Originally Posted by BezO

But the formulas that were used in that link didn't seem to mean much. I think the simpler stats are a better barometer, like yards, percentage, TD/Ints, ect.

Simpler stats are a pretty lousy barometer for analysis because they make no attempt whatsoever to contextualize. The FO stats- DPAR and DVOA work because they examine the success rate of every play and are geared to take situation and opponent into account. And by those measures, Vick's passing performance was among the worst in the league, and was significantly below the performance you would expect from an average player in those same spots. Of course football is the hardest sport of any to gauge the worth of any one individual, and if you look at the fairly limited sample of Matt Schaub's work, you'll see that he sports an almost identical DPAR rating to Vick (and a much inferior DVOA, in large part thanks to his TD/INT ratio), which suggests that at least part of what is at work is the subpar receiving talent that Vick has to work with. There is generally speaking a symbiotic relationship between receiving play and quarterback play, which is why Donovan McNabb suddenly bolted up to being ranked 3rd overall in DVOA whereas in the pre-Owens years he was 14th, 20th, 18th and 17th.

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by seanmac

Actually, those ratings are fantastic and do a much better job of capturing the quality of performance at the position than any conventional rating. And it would help if you were reading them correctly- those stats are broken down by year, and the link I showed you was strictly for last season, with links provided for previous seasons.

What those formulas do is give a ranking to QBs according to what the formula creator deems important. But different teams have different philosophies and personnel. For example, a QB with a lower percentage may not be less accurate than a QB with a higher percentage. He may just attempt longer passes, or his coach may tell him to throw the ball away after looking at a second option.

"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." Off the top, this formula gives credit for rushing touchdowns. That has nothing to do with passing ability. And the formula penalizes non-running QBs on running teams because they're not as involved. But that doesn't make them less of a passer. They just pass less.

Secondly, Vick's last full year, 2002, he was 11th according to these ratings. Does that mean he was the 11th best passer in the league in 2002? Or does it mean that he had more rushing touchdowns that year than in 2004? These ratings don't support your argument.

Lastly, the formula you are using to judge QB's passing ability has Bulger #6, Pennington #8, and Brees #9. Brees had an superb year in 2004. Definitely better than Bulger & Pennington. Were they better passers than Brees last year?

If you want to rate Vick as a passer, look at the formula that's widely accepted throughout the NFL. Passer Rating. He was 21st. And still, that formula is based on ratios that someone thought were relevant and important. Note the differences in DPAR rankings and Passer Rating rankings. Who's to say which is a better reflection of a QB's passing skills? Both are biased because they put an emphasis on particular statistics. But like I said above, different coaches have different philosophies. Often, those philosophies show in the teams stats.

But I did misread or misunderstand something. One of the explainations for a formula said they only processed stats through 2003. "ISSUES WITH DVOA/DPAR - You need to have the entire play-by-play of a season in order to compute it, so it is useless for comparing players of today to players of history. As of this writing, we have processed four seasons, 2000-2003." I guess this explaination is not up to date.