The Brian Hoyer thread...

[MRMsix6]

b00bs is going all Kill Bill Uma Thurman on the Hoyer apologists. Just limbless torsos and blood splattered all over the floor in here.

 

[bob2the2nd]

Go read their website, bob. Do some research on your own before dismissing something out of hand.

They outline their methodology pretty well on the site. Is it scientifically defensible, like you would probably like it to be? No. Then again, neither is QB Rating...it's just been around longer.

Here's an example, though. If a DT makes 8 tackles in a game are those 8 tackles the same if it's 8 1-yard tackles vs 8 6-yard tackles? That is the kind of analysis that PFF puts in to their numbers that other stats miss. Is there some subjectivity? Absolutely. Is it a y=mx+b formula? No.

What it is, however, is an unbiased rating of each player on each play to get an idea of their overall cumulative performance in a given game based on a ton of factors. If a QB throws an INT on a Hail Mary in the end zone when they're down 5 as time expires, he's not punished for that. It provides context to a player's performance in the overall scheme of the game.

Start at these places:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/faq/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/why-subscribe-2/

If you're too lazy to do some reading, that's on you.

are you fucking kidding me? literally half of their formula is a ranking by an "analyst", they flat out tell you that. and they dont actually tell you the formulas for the other half of the equation. Then for the actual analyzing part They just give snippets like you mentioned that a hail mary doesnt count against the QB. jlj3184, this is literally nothing more than a bunch of fans sitting around grading a game, and charging for it.

the moment you introduce subjectivity into rankings such as these, they become almost entirely worthless. Once again how a system could look at the browns game on sunday, and determine that hoyer was by far and away the worst performer on offense for the browns is laughable. especially if their analysis holds true and they didnt hold his interception against him.

edit: i dont care how many "nfl people" they say they work with, or how accurate their system is, any system that introduces subjectivity into a ratings, is going to be flawed. thats the nature of subjectivity.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I do appreciate that PFF admits that grading every player on every play is a subjective pursuit. I appreciate their caveats - especially the part where they say their analysis of quarterbacks receives the most critical emails from readers - but anyone who claims football players can be objectively assessed as individuals is selling you a line of bullshit.

So in other words, PFF would object to how their data is being used this week in this thread.

 

[brownindian]

Sounds great, is it true?

Steelers won the Superbowl in 2005 and 2008 with Roethlisberger under center. His stats those years:
2005: Comp %: 62.7 Attempts per game: 22.3 Yards per game: 198.8 TD/INT: 17/9
2008: Comp %: 59.9 Attempts per game: 29.3 Yards per game: 206.3 TD/INT: 17/15

Seahawks with Russell Wilson:
2013: Comp %: 63.1 Attempts per game: 25.4 Yards per game: 209.8 TD/INT: 26/9

Brian Hoyer currently:
2013: Comp %: 55.7 Attempts per game: 32.5 Yards per game: 254.2 TD/INT: 11/5

I do think there is merit to taking the ball out of Hoyer's hands a bit more than they've done already and build out the running game. If they limited Hoyer to roughly 25 passing attempts per game and got his completion percentage up to roughly 60%, he'd be on par with Big Ben and Wilson (outside of Wilson's TD numbers, which are absurd)

Between the 3, I'd say Hoyer is the worst, but the gap isn't as large as you are insinuating.

I do agree with you in that Hoyer is not as bad - But where those 2 QBs excel are in their intangibles - Big Ben is almost impossible to bring down. Wilson is very mobile. In other words when pressure comes there is a good chance that they have the power to keep the play alive with their scrambling - That is something that Hoyer is not so great @. Plus both the Seahawks and the Steelers were amazing in their defense when they won they superbowl. We are still ways off.

 

[The Voice]

The Shanahan WCO is more of a run first offense, I will give you that. However it is closer to a 55/45 split (run vs pass).

in 2012 the Redskins had 491 passing attempts and 519 rushing
that is 30 passing attempts and 32 rushing attempts per game (on average).

in 2013 they had 611 passing and 453 rushing 38 / 28 split.

2011 591 / 400.

The issue with being a run first team is solely on the DC turned HC. Pettine doesn't want to throw the football. He even stated as much when he said he doesn't want to throw 30 times a game. That is a huge issue.

Even the texans when Kyle was the OC threw more than they ran.

The issue is everyone knows Pettine wants to run the football. So load up the box and dare the QB to beat you over the top. Bill O'Brien even said as much duing his radio show yesterday. They walled off the outside and forced the Browns to run up the middle. Constantly putting 8 in the box. Hoyer had 180 yards passing going into the 4th quarter. At that time the Texans felt they had the game under control (no respect for the offense to do anything) so they relaxed the defense and gave up yards but no score.

Pettine doesn't call the plays, shanahan does. Pettine has already stated he doesn't even override him as he has too much work doing what he's doing already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk at your local pub.

 

[The Voice]

Seattle won a Superbowl by building a top 5 run game, top 5 defense, and limiting the QB to few decisions. Wilson is good enough to not make a mistake and make the correct read when called upon, and that's good enough to run Pete Carroll's offense effectively.

The 49ers have competed for a Superbowl relying heavily on a great defense, a great run game and limiting the QB to simple reads in the offense.

Wilson and Kap are two dimensional quarterbacks that can use their legs to get out of situations. Our defense is no where near top 5 and our run game still needs work.

Houston and Baltimore have also seen sustained success stemming from building the run game and defense first. (Though I will admit that it took a Flacco anomoly to lead to the Superbowl the Ravens won recently, and runs counter to my point)

Denver made it to the Superbowl with Manning excelling at the qb position, though they got destroyed.

I am willing to admit that the QB is the most important position on the field, but it is also overrated: A team can win without a top 5 QB. To that point, when a QB does succeed, we have a tendency to over-rate their importance in the victory. (See: Roethlisberger and Wilson)

Interesting that you stopped at top 5, is their a reason for that? Roethlisberger is probably a top 10 qb.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk at your local pub.

 

[jlj3184]

are you fucking kidding me? literally half of their formula is a ranking by an "analyst", they flat out tell you that. and they dont actually tell you the formulas for the other half of the equation. Then for the actual analyzing part They just give snippets like you mentioned that a hail mary doesnt count against the QB. jlj3184, this is literally nothing more than a bunch of fans sitting around grading a game, and charging for it.

the moment you introduce subjectivity into rankings such as these, they become almost entirely worthless. Once again how a system could look at the browns game on sunday, and determine that hoyer was by far and away the worst performer on offense for the browns is laughable. especially if their analysis holds true and they didnt hold his interception against him.

edit: i dont care how many "nfl people" they say they work with, or how accurate their system is, any system that introduces subjectivity into a ratings, is going to be flawed. thats the nature of subjectivity.

Ok, bob, stick to QB Rating and yards as barometers of a "good game"...because all 330 yard games are created equal.

We're not calculating mechanical advantage here, so give me a break on the "formulas" bs.

If a RB runs a flat route, breaks 5 tackles, and runs for 35 yards the QB is just as good as one who throws a perfectly placed pass 35 yards downfield over the outside shoulder against Cover 2 according to your measures. Malarkey.

This is the kind of stuff PFF takes into consideration in their grading. Sorry the hundreds of thousands of scenarios that can play themselves out in a game don't lend themselves to a nice, neat formula you can wrap your head around.

Thorough statistical analysis involves consideration of both qualitative and quantitative data. These guys undergo training to reduce the inherent subjectivity in grading plays/games as much as possible. The grades are double checked and validated by another paid analyst.

If you want to keep living in a world where the only thing that matters are 1's and 0's, feel free, but you're going to continue falling further and further behind.

Congrats on your +5.3 this weekend.

 

[CSF]

I think it's safe to say it's Johnny time !

 

[CosmoKramer]

Brian Hoyer sets Browns record with 30 incompletions
By Pat McManamon | ESPN.com

CLEVELAND -- Brian Hoyer set a Cleveland Browns record he probably did not want to set in Sunday’s 23-7 loss to the Houston Texans.

Hoyer threw 30 incompletions, the most in one game in team history, according to Elias.

He also had the highest number of incompletions in the NFL this season, according to ESPN Stats & Information.

Only 18 times since 1950 have Browns quarterbacks thrown 25 or more incompletions in a game. Hoyer is on the list twice -- 30 against Houston (he went 20-for-50) and 25 against Jacksonville earlier this season, according to Pro Football Reference.

Jason Campbell's 29 incompletions in a loss in Cincinnati a year ago rank second in team history. Some other outstanding Browns quarterbacks had games when they threw a lot of missed passes. Brian Sipe had 28 in a loss to Houston in 1981, and Hall of Famer Otto Graham also had 28 in a 1952 win over Pittsburgh.

The games with the most incompletions in team history break down this way:

• Hoyer -- 30
• Campbell -- 29
• Sipe -- 28
• Graham -- 28
• Brandon Weeden (2012 and 2013) -- 27 (twice)
• Mike Phipps and Sipe (1975) -- 27 (combined)

Four times the Browns had 26 incompletions in a game, seven times they had 25.

Since 1940, 85 teams have finished games with 30 or more incompletions, with the 1988Chicago Bears finishing with the all-time high of 38.

Clearly as the NFL has turned more into a passing league, games with more incompletions are becoming more common.

The league has had seven games with 30 or more incompletions since 2010.

The Browns have had seven games since 2012 of 25 or more incompletions.

Hoyer did not specifically address the record, but he did say that he is willing to take an incompletion with a throwaway to avoid a sack. Joe Thomas said earlier this season that is one of Hoyer’s strengths.

“That’s just the way I play,” Hoyer said. “I don’t want to put that (sack) on my offensive linemen. If a sack is a negative play, a throwaway I don’t see as a negative play. Maybe your completion percentage won’t be as great, but no game was ever lost on a throwaway."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/p...oyer-sets-browns-record-with-30-incompletions

 

[MalTalm]

I do agree with you in that Hoyer is not as bad - But where those 2 QBs excel are in their intangibles - Big Ben is almost impossible to bring down. Wilson is very mobile. In other words when pressure comes there is a good chance that they have the power to keep the play alive with their scrambling - That is something that Hoyer is not so great @. Plus both the Seahawks and the Steelers were amazing in their defense when they won they superbowl. We are still ways off.

Roethlisberger is actually pretty bad against the rush, averaging near 3 sacks a game as a QB. Because he has those plays where he is able to stand tall and execute an unbelievable pass, we assume he is better than he actually is. On his career, his is sacked roughly 9% of the time he drops back in the pocket.
Meanwhile, in 2008 (the year he won a Superbowl) he threw 2 TDs to 7 INTs in pressure situations and saw his completion percentage dip to 48.8%. (Note: I'd love to provide the 2005 stats, as I bet they'd be worse, but unfortunately PFF doesn't go any earlier than 2007)

Russell Wilson himself was actually sacked in 10% of his drop backs last season. He saw his completion percentage dip last year down to 49.3% when under pressure, but he did excel at making TD throws, putting up 10 TDs to 5 INTs.

Brian Hoyer is only sacked 4.4% of his dropbacks: he owes this to a great offensive line and his ability to make quick reads. He sees his completion percentage dip down to 46.6% when under pressure, and has thrown for 3 INTs to 3 TDs.

Roethlisberger may be bigger, Wilson faster, but their production isn't significantly better under pressure: Hoyer is on par (just below to be honest) with these two former Superbowl winners.

Wilson and Kap are two dimensional quarterbacks that can use their legs to get out of situations. Our defense is no where near top 5 and our run game still needs work.

Denver made it to the Superbowl with Manning excelling at the qb position, though they got destroyed.

Interesting that you stopped at top 5, is their a reason for that? Roethlisberger is probably a top 10 qb.

First point: Completely agree. My entire point here has been that there is more than one way to build a competitive team. Hoyer seems to be roughly mediocre to slightly below mediocre, but we elevate a QBs skill based on their respective teams' success. It may be easier for the Browns to draft and build an elite defense and running game rather than trying out 100 parts at QB. It's easy enough to say Hoyer isn't one of the 5 or 10 best QBs in the league this year, but the real question is: Do you need a top 10 QB to win a title? I'd say overwhelmingly no.

"Great" QBs who play in the NFL currently: Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Andrew Luck

Some of the "others" who have won titles: Ben Roethlisberger (who admittedly is approaching great status nowadays, but his early career numbers when he was actually competing and winning championships, notsomuch.) Joe Flacco, Eli Manning, and Russell Wilson.

Honorable mentions (guys who competed for a Super Bowl in the past decade but lost): Colin Kapernick, Rex Grossman and Matt Hasselbeck

TL;DR: The Browns may be best off signing Hoyer to a 3 year deal, and working to develop the rest of the team. Find someone to sit behind him (probably Manziel, though I have serious reservations) who may be able to replace him down the road, and in the meantime, build a great defense and running team.

If we all agree that it's easier to build a great run system and a great defense than it is to find a franchise QB, and we all agree that Hoyer is effective when the rest of the team is performing at a high level, why not focus on getting the parts put in place around him? Just a thought.

(And to TheVoice's second point: Nah, 5 was arbitrary. I'd still say you'd be hard pressed to prove Roethlisberger was a top 10 QB either year he led his team to a Super Bowl, but I would concede that point in recent history, this year especially)

 

[The Voice]

Roethlisberger is actually pretty bad against the rush, averaging near 3 sacks a game as a QB. Because he has those plays where he is able to stand tall and execute an unbelievable pass, we assume he is better than he actually is. On his career, his is sacked roughly 9% of the time he drops back in the pocket.
Meanwhile, in 2008 (the year he won a Superbowl) he threw 2 TDs to 7 INTs in pressure situations and saw his completion percentage dip to 48.8%. (Note: I'd love to provide the 2005 stats, as I bet they'd be worse, but unfortunately PFF doesn't go any earlier than 2007)

Russell Wilson himself was actually sacked in 10% of his drop backs last season. He saw his completion percentage dip last year down to 49.3% when under pressure, but he did excel at making TD throws, putting up 10 TDs to 5 INTs.

Brian Hoyer is only sacked 4.4% of his dropbacks: he owes this to a great offensive line and his ability to make quick reads. He sees his completion percentage dip down to 46.6% when under pressure, and has thrown for 3 INTs to 3 TDs.

Roethlisberger may be bigger, Wilson faster, but their production isn't significantly better under pressure: Hoyer is on par (just below to be honest) with these two former Superbowl winners.

Yeah, but I think the rapist's durability is a huge factor here. He's able to take those hits and usually not miss a game or a beat. Last night he was starting to get up slower as the game went on. I don't think Hoyer or Wilson could take that same punishment and be fine. I also think it's worth noting if these guys drop back the same amount as each other.

"Great" QBs who play in the NFL currently: Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Andrew Luck

This is all subjective though, what are your barometers for being "great".

TL;DR: The Browns may be best off signing Hoyer to a 3 year deal, and working to develop the rest of the team. Find someone to sit behind him (probably Manziel, though I have serious reservations) who may be able to replace him down the road, and in the meantime, build a great defense and running team.

I'd rather watch him the rest of the year before I'm ready to commit to that kind of deal. If he plays like he did on Sunday for the rest of the year- no thanks.

If we all agree that it's easier to build a great run system and a great defense than it is to find a franchise QB, and we all agree that Hoyer is effective when the rest of the team is performing at a high level, why not focus on getting the parts put in place around him? Just a thought.

I'm not going to lie, I think we really fucked up when we didn't suck for luck. That's water under the bridge now, but I agree it is very hard to find an elite QB. However, you said Hoyer is mediocre to below mediocre, so I'd rather try to get that QB that is between great and good.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk at your local pub.

 

[MalTalm]

Yeah, but I think the rapist's durability is a huge factor here. He's able to take those hits and usually not miss a game or a beat. Last night he was starting to get up slower as the game went on. I don't think Hoyer or Wilson could take that same punishment and be fine. I also think it's worth noting if these guys drop back the same amount as each other.

I wouldn't argue this point, but it's moving the goal posts. Your original claim was that Wilson and Roethlisberger had an "it" factor that Hoyer lacked, and you deemed it their ability to be successful against pressure. I outlined how all three are actually pretty similar when the defense can exert pressure on them.

Besides, a QB who can get sacked more often in a game is hardly a strength for a team.

This is all subjective though, what are your barometers for being "great".

Definitely subjective, though most arguments laid out here by yourself or others on this thread have been subjective on most fronts. But to answer the question, a QB who has sustained success in an offense predicated on a pass-first offense is what I would deem "great." Of the QBs I've listed, none have had a sustained run game buoy their success in the NFL, and all of them (save Luck) have seen success at the highest level. The other QBs listed afterwards have not shown an ability to succeed without a high end run game and top flight defense.

I'd rather watch him the rest of the year before I'm ready to commit to that kind of deal. If he plays like he did on Sunday for the rest of the year- no thanks.

I more or less agree with this, and my original point (and restated a couple of times in the past two pages) was the Browns have the luxury of making this decision in April: There's no need to decide anything now. That said, Hoyer is likely going to have some more good and bad performances coming. He's at his best when Shannahan can keep him at roughly 25 pass attempts per game: Roughly the same number that Wilson and Kap see the most success, and where Roethlisberger was for the first 5 years of his career.

I'm not going to lie, I think we really fucked up when we didn't suck for luck. That's water under the bridge now, but I agree it is very hard to find an elite QB. However, you said Hoyer is mediocre to below mediocre, so I'd rather try to get that QB that is between great and good.

Yes, but even mediocrity at the NFL level is valuable. A mediocre QB is somewhere in that 12-18 range out of 32 starting QBs. That would put him in with the likes of Joe Flacco, Russell Wilson, Jay Cutler or Andy Dalton. That really is probably where his ability lies, but he'll likely come at a much cheaper cost than those others due to having a lack of starts before getting his contract.

You can win in the NFL with a mediocre QB, but you might spend 10 more years trying to find someone between "great" and "good" (IE A Matt Ryan or Philip Rivers).

 

[The Voice]

I wouldn't argue this point, but it's moving the goal posts. Your original claim was that Wilson and Roethlisberger had an "it" factor that Hoyer lacked, and you deemed it their ability to be successful against pressure. I outlined how all three are actually pretty similar when the defense can exert pressure on them.

I never said Wilson had the "it" factor. I said I believe the rapist is better then what you're evaluating him at.

Besides, a QB who can get sacked more often in a game is hardly a strength for a team.

It is from a durability standpoint, but it's not something I'd want to test.

Definitely subjective, though most arguments laid out here by yourself or others on this thread have been subjective on most fronts. But to answer the question, a QB who has sustained success in an offense predicated on a pass-first offense is what I would deem "great." Of the QBs I've listed, none have had a sustained run game buoy their success in the NFL, and all of them (save Luck) have seen success at the highest level. The other QBs listed afterwards have not shown an ability to succeed without a high end run game and top flight defense.

The rapist has already shown the ability to make the playoffs with a piss poor running back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk at your local pub.

 

[Ohdang]

I think it's safe to say it's Johnny time !

You definitely should go back to the Cavs section

 

[Jack Brickman]

You definitely should go back to the Cavs section

And then from there just leave the board.