Drew vs Tom vs Time

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,180
A lot has been made of Tom Brady's continued performance at an age where seemingly all other QBs in history have completely fallen off a cliff. Brady attributes this to his TB12 method and Alex Guerrero, and as he prepares for another season having just turned 41 I was looking up the sort of stats he would need this season (or next) to pass some of the all time passing records. I realized that Brady actually has some surprising competition even within the category of QBs who have not had HGH shipped to their house.

Tom Brady turned 41 two weeks ago. Drew Brees will turn 40 two weeks after the Saints final regular season game. They are currently tied at 488 TDs (51 away from the all time TD lead) and Brees sits nearly a full season ahead of Brady from a yardage perspective at 70,445 to Tom's 66,159, and Brees stands almost certain to pass Peyton's all time record of 71,490.

Now Brees' Yards and TDs were slightly down last year, his overall efficiency was at or better than his hall of fame career's averages and actually was in range of some of his best seasons. He lead the league with 8.1 Yards/Attempt, higher than all but two s of his previous seasons and his 1.5% Interception % was the lowest of his career and 4th in the league. His reduced counting stats could probably be almost completely attributed to having two of the best running backs in the league on his team.

Brady just this month expressed intent to continue to play in the 2019 season, and likewise Drew Brees signed a 2 year deal this off season. Are we entering an age where 40 is not three years passed the end of a QBs career and rather just a normal milestone for the exceptional talent regardless? Or perhaps we're seeing additional proof of the benefits of the anti-inflammatory diet.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
People always talk about the bodies holding up, but what about the minds and reflexes? To me that’s just as impressive, given all the memorization and rapid fire processing required of an NFL QB.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,622
Brees career has been hurt in some ways by consistently having an awful defense, which has cost him a lot of team success over the years. However; since his defense loves putting him in a hole; he has really racked up a ton of garbage time stats. As a Brees fantasy owner, nobody racks up the 150 yard fourth quarters like Brees.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,468
People always talk about the bodies holding up, but what about the minds and reflexes? To me that’s just as impressive, given all the memorization and rapid fire processing required of an NFL QB.
And eye sight. That definitely degrades for most people by 40, and it's not like diet and stretching is going to change that at all.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
People always talk about the bodies holding up, but what about the minds and reflexes? To me that’s just as impressive, given all the memorization and rapid fire processing required of an NFL QB.
I would guess the benefit of accumulated knowledge probably outweighs the decline from peak memorization capability, especially for someone only in his early 40s, and as mentally active (through film study, etc) as Brady is. I'd liken Brady's QB play (which requires elite spatial intelligence and benefits from having seen similar/identical situations through years of play/practice) to chess. While studies have shown the average player peaks sometime in his or hear early 30s, the best players tend to reach their apex rating in their 40s or later.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,236
Drew Brees is never mentioned in the conversation of greatest all time QBs and it's a shame. He's absolutely unbelievable and has been for a very long time. It's entirely possible that he will retire holding most/all of the major career passing records.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
Drew Brees is never mentioned in the conversation of greatest all time QBs and it's a shame. He's absolutely unbelievable and has been for a very long time. It's entirely possible that he will retire holding most/all of the major career passing records.
His play on the road and outdoors can’t be ignored. If Larry Walker is not a Hall of Famer, Brees isn’t in the conversation among the best QBs.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
I would guess the benefit of accumulated knowledge probably outweighs the decline from peak memorization capability, especially for someone only in his early 40s, and as mentally active (through film study, etc) as Brady is. I'd liken Brady's QB play (which requires elite spatial intelligence and benefits from having seen similar/identical situations through years of play/practice) to chess. While studies have shown the average player peaks sometime in his or hear early 30s, the best players tend to reach their apex rating in their 40s or later.
Perhaps, but don’t processing speeds slow, too? Like can’t a 25 year old thinks faster and access information more quickly than a 40 year old? In chess the timing issue isn’t as pressing.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,236
His play on the road and outdoors can’t be ignored. If Larry Walker is not a Hall of Famer, Brees isn’t in the conversation among the best QBs.
He's not Tom Brady, but here are his numbers on the road, and then outdoors, career:

Road: 66.1%, 206 td, 117 int, 7.3 ypa, 91.9 rating
Outdoors: 64.7%, 200 td, 107 int, 7.1 ypa, 90.9 rating

For reference, here are Peyton's:

Road: 64.7%, 262 td, 142 int, 7.5 ypa, 93.3 rating
Outdoors: 64.6%, 270 td, 138 int, 7.6 ypa, 94.0 rating

So better than Brees, but Brees' career numbers on the road and outdoors are still pretty solid. Just not as good as the very best.

But his home numbers count too, you know.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,716
ESPN did a list that had Brees as #9 in QBs in the last 40 years. He gets plenty of pub, but he'll be appreciated more when he's done and Saints likely founder.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,245
Boston, MA
He's not Tom Brady, but here are his numbers on the road, and then outdoors, career:

Road: 66.1%, 206 td, 117 int, 7.3 ypa, 91.9 rating
Outdoors: 64.7%, 200 td, 107 int, 7.1 ypa, 90.9 rating

For reference, here are Peyton's:

Road: 64.7%, 262 td, 142 int, 7.5 ypa, 93.3 rating
Outdoors: 64.6%, 270 td, 138 int, 7.6 ypa, 94.0 rating

So better than Brees, but Brees' career numbers on the road and outdoors are still pretty solid. Just not as good as the very best.

But his home numbers count too, you know.
I would say that his home numbers especially count in a comparison against another QB who spent most of his career playing in a dome.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
63,822
One of the underrated stories out of the baseball PED experience, imo, was the players who said what PEDs really allowed some of them to do was keep playing after they had finally learned how to hit properly.

Like, it takes so damned long, by the time they get it, they have to retire. Normally. For awhile, some of them didn't.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,634
where I was last at
I would guess the benefit of accumulated knowledge probably outweighs the decline from peak memorization capability, especially for someone only in his early 40s, and as mentally active (through film study, etc) as Brady is. I'd liken Brady's QB play (which requires elite spatial intelligence and benefits from having seen similar/identical situations through years of play/practice) to chess. While studies have shown the average player peaks sometime in his or hear early 30s, the best players tend to reach their apex rating in their 40s or later.
I would think an athlete's ability to respond reflexively to situations may increase with age, ie accurately processing the data, but their ability to successfully execute declines. As to "best players reach their apex in the 40s" that screams SSS and how many athlete go out at the top in their 40s?
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
He's not Tom Brady, but here are his numbers on the road, and then outdoors, career:

Road: 66.1%, 206 td, 117 int, 7.3 ypa, 91.9 rating
Outdoors: 64.7%, 200 td, 107 int, 7.1 ypa, 90.9 rating

For reference, here are Peyton's:

Road: 64.7%, 262 td, 142 int, 7.5 ypa, 93.3 rating
Outdoors: 64.6%, 270 td, 138 int, 7.6 ypa, 94.0 rating

So better than Brees, but Brees' career numbers on the road and outdoors are still pretty solid. Just not as good as the very best.

But his home numbers count too, you know.
Yes, Larry Walker’s home numbers count, too. And his stats have actually beeen park adjusted. Have you done so with Brees?

I know what his numbers are. He’s got a 90.9 rating outdoors, and a 102.6 in a dome. Brady has 96.8 outdoors, and a 112.0 in a dome. Peyton is 94.0/99.1; Rodgers is 102.3/109.6; Romo is 96.1/104.7; Roethlisberger is 93.2/104.2.

Playing in a dome is worth on average about 4 points of passer rating. Basically, applying a park adjustment, Brees would be lucky to be considered a top 5 QB of his era. He should be happy he got to play half his games in a dome, take his records, and his HOF induction, and be content.
 
Last edited:

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
As to "best players reach their apex in the 40s" that screams SSS and how many athlete go out at the top in their 40s?
The quote was “reach their apex [chess] rating.” They’ve been playing chess for like 1500 years, how is it a small sample size?
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,634
where I was last at
The quote was “reach their apex [chess] rating.” They’ve been playing chess for like 1500 years, how is it a small sample size?
I read your post in the context of Brees and professional athletes playing at their peaks into their 40s. I agree that the brain sharpens with age and expererience, but sadly the body can't keep up.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,598
One of the underrated stories out of the baseball PED experience, imo, was the players who said what PEDs really allowed some of them to do was keep playing after they had finally learned how to hit properly.

Like, it takes so damned long, by the time they get it, they have to retire. Normally. For awhile, some of them didn't.

Old fighters on TRT we’re really good.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,236
Yes, Larry Walker’s home numbers count, too. And his stats have actually beeen park adjusted. Have you done so with Brees?

I know what his numbers are. He’s got a 90.9 rating outdoors, and a 102.6 in a dome. Brady has 96.8 outdoors, and a 112.0 in a dome. Peyton is 94.0/99.1; Rodgers is 102.3/109.6; Romo is 96.1/104.7; Roethlisberger is 93.2/104.2.

Playing in a dome is worth on average about 4 points of passer rating. Basically, applying a park adjustment, Brees would be lucky to be considered a top 5 QB of his era. He should be happy he got to play half his games in a dome, take his records, and his HOF induction, and be content.
Of course he's fortunate to have played his home games in a dome. Nobody is suggesting otherwise.

But he's been incredibly great for a long long long time (and showing no signs of slowing down really). Dude is absolutely has a seat at the table of all time great QBs. You don't have to be the king (Brady) in order to have a seat at the table.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,180
From what I remember during the Balco days, HGH provided an additional benefit to hitters of actual improving eyesight.

As for Brady vs Brees. I think even most Saints fans will have a hard time of arguing Brees as better than Brady, but we have an absolutely amazing situation where 2 of the top 5 (keeping it conservative so everyone can agree) QBs in the league are playing at an age where almost every other QB was below replacement player and still having some of their best seasons ever. The all-time passing record is almost certain to be broken this year and the all-time TD record is likely to if a player can remain healthy enough remain a starter for 1.5 of the next two seasons.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Kind of amazing that two other QBs in Brees' division have won MVPs but not him. He had a good case in 2011 but that was apex Rodgers. 2009 is a little harder to fathom; that was peak "we're going to give it to Peyton every year" voting. He had a case last year, too, though I think Brady was a little better.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
Kind of amazing that two other QBs in Brees' division have won MVPs but not him. He had a good case in 2011 but that was apex Rodgers. 2009 is a little harder to fathom; that was peak "we're going to give it to Peyton every year" voting. He had a case last year, too, though I think Brady was a little better.
In my opinion Brees did not have a legitimate MVP case last year. And Brady wasn't a little better. He was a lot better. Brees was 3rd in DYAR and DVOA, 14th in QBR (fwiw), and that's not even considering RBs like Turley and Bell. And of course he didn't actually receive a single vote.

PFF only graded him out as among the top 5 QBs in 5 of his 16 games (and only 4 more in the top 10). Compare to 12 in the top 5 for Brady, and 7 for Ryan. PFF also had Brees among the top 10 QBs in only two of their six key metrics, compared to 6 for 6 for Brady, and 5 of 6 for Ryan.

He was a very successful game manager last year and obviously accurate, but he may not have been the MVP of his team. He led the league in percentage of his passing yards coming after the catch (53.3%; 2,668 of his 5,004). He had two of the top 10 receivers in the league in YAC, and also led the league in screen pass yardage (593 yards). He was last in the league at average target depth (6.9 yards), and below average in passer rating under pressure, 63.6 (compare to Brady at 95.8). He has really benefited from the screen and dumpoff game. I like the story this graphic tells:





He certainly was a candidate in 2009, but Peyton, Favre, and even Rivers had legitimate cases.
 
Last edited:

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,123
The comp is really Favre's first year with Minnesota (40). Statistically, it was excellent, 33:7 TD:INT, 107 passer rating. But by the end he was clearly running on fumes, the Saints really beat the crap out of him in the NFCCG. He of course played another season for the Vikings and was terrible.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
If all the qbs play at below replacement level maybe we should have a discussion about the meaning of replacement level.
It may have been somewhat inelegant, but he said "at an age where almost every other QB was below replacement player," not "in an age."
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
In my opinion Brees did not have a legitimate MVP case last year. And Brady wasn't a little better. He was a lot better. Brees was 3rd in DYAR and DVOA, 14th in QBR (fwiw), and that's not even considering RBs like Turley and Bell. And of course he didn't actually receive a single vote.

PFF only graded him out as among the top 5 QBs in 5 of his 16 games (and only 4 more in the top 10). Compare to 12 in the top 5 for Brady, and 7 for Ryan. PFF also had Brees among the top 10 QBs in only two of their six key metrics, compared to 6 for 6 for Brady, and 5 of 6 for Ryan.

He was a very successful game manager last year and obviously accurate, but he may not have been the MVP of his team. He led the league in percentage of his passing yards coming after the catch (53.3%; 2,668 of his 5,004). He had two of the top 10 receivers in the league in YAC, and also led the league in screen pass yardage (593 yards). He was last in the league at average target depth (6.9 yards), and below average in passer rating under pressure, 63.6 (compare to Brady at 95.8). He has really benefited from the screen and dumpoff game. I like the story this graphic tells:
He's not competitive by QBR and PFF but I'm not necessarily inclined to give those a lot of weight. Brees was second in passer rating, first in yards per attempt, second in adjusted net yards per attempt (my favorite quick-and-dirty QB stat), second in avoiding sacks, and he set the all-time completion percentage record. The Saints finished fourth in points, second in yards, second in both points and yards per drive. NFL1000 ranked him the #4 QB.

As far as how YAC-dependent Brees' game was in 2017, I kind of think that's what he had to work with last year. Michael Thomas is great, but they had no tight ends to speak of, and their #2 WR was Ted Ginn (who virtually set a career high in receiving yards at 32). They traded away their top deep threat before the season and drafted Alvin Kamara; obviously Brees was going to throw less deep, more short stuff and let his backs make something happen after the catch. (Normally this is a criticism of Brady, but of course with Cooks on the team in 2017 and Edelman hurt, the deep ball was more a part of his game)

I still would have given it to Brady but I thought it was dumb Brees hardly came up in MVP talk. FWIW the only players to get votes were Brady (40/50), Gurley (8), and Wentz (2).
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,943
NH
Brees had his running backs get 3100 yards from scrimmage. When is the last time any premier quarterback had something like that? Brady in 2007, maybe?

I've never been completely sold on Brees. While I'm fully willing to give him credit for being great and a sure fire hall of famer, I think there's a rather big gap between Brady, Manning, Rodgers, and Brees, with Brees not even being close to the other three. He's a high volume passer in a high passing era in the most favorable conditions to it. Like the Todd Helton of football. An all time great at home, and a 91.9 rating on the road. A 102.6 rating in dome, where he plays most of his games, and a 90.9 rating outside.

Brady has a 112 rating in a dome, obviously it's a smaller sample size, but jesus. What would Brady's stats be if he played 80%+ of his games in very favorable conditions as Brees does?

This isn't even considering the fact that the NFC South has had shitty defenses throughout much of his career.

Brees will make in into the hall his first attempt, but no one should be confusing Brees with Brady or Peyton. He's a 21st century Fouts.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,236
That may all be true, Seels. But he's going to retire #1 all time in completions, #1 all time in passing yards, #1 or #2 all time in passing TDs, #1 in completion percentage, top 5 all time in passer rating, a better YPA than Tom Brady (that's up for grabs, but right now he's ahead of TB), #1 or #2 all time in AV, top 5 all time in 4th quarter comebacks, at least 11 pro bowls, and at least one Super Bowl ring - in a head-to-head matchup over Peyton Manning. During his time in NO, he's only had two defenses ranked in the top 10 in yards allowed.

Add that all up, and it's not just a HOF-caliber resumé. It's an elite, inner-circle HOF resumé. It puts him right up there in the conversation of all-time greats. Is he better than Montana or Brady or even Peyton? Certainly not Brady or Montana. Almost certainly not Peyton. But after that..... who else has a resumé better than Brees'? The only way you can do it is by basically disregarding - or hugely discounting - his home, dome games. But do we do that for Marino, whose opponents routinely wilted in the heat of Miami? Do we do that for Peyton or Elway, whose opponents ran out of gas in the altitude of Denver? The point being that all games count. Yes when we are getting into the nitty gritty and comparing Brady to Brees, yes, these things come into play. But otherwise, Brees' overall resumé is absolutely off the charts incredible.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
That may all be true, Seels. But he's going to retire #1 all time in completions, #1 all time in passing yards, #1 or #2 all time in passing TDs, #1 in completion percentage, top 5 all time in passer rating, a better YPA than Tom Brady (that's up for grabs, but right now he's ahead of TB), #1 or #2 all time in AV, top 5 all time in 4th quarter comebacks, at least 11 pro bowls, and at least one Super Bowl ring - in a head-to-head matchup over Peyton Manning. During his time in NO, he's only had two defenses ranked in the top 10 in yards allowed.

Add that all up, and it's not just a HOF-caliber resumé. It's an elite, inner-circle HOF resumé. It puts him right up there in the conversation of all-time greats. Is he better than Montana or Brady or even Peyton? Certainly not Brady or Montana. Almost certainly not Peyton. But after that..... who else has a resumé better than Brees'? The only way you can do it is by basically disregarding - or hugely discounting - his home, dome games. But do we do that for Marino, whose opponents routinely wilted in the heat of Miami? Do we do that for Peyton or Elway, whose opponents ran out of gas in the altitude of Denver? The point being that all games count. Yes when we are getting into the nitty gritty and comparing Brady to Brees, yes, these things come into play. But otherwise, Brees' overall resumé is absolutely off the charts incredible.
Isn’t the neg on Peyton’s HFA the decade plus he played in a dome and not the couple high level years he played in Denver?
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Brees had his running backs get 3100 yards from scrimmage. When is the last time any premier quarterback had something like that? Brady in 2007, maybe?
Ingram and Kamara were two of the three best skill players on his team. It would be dumb for them not to rack up big-time yardage.

I've never been completely sold on Brees. While I'm fully willing to give him credit for being great and a sure fire hall of famer, I think there's a rather big gap between Brady, Manning, Rodgers, and Brees, with Brees not even being close to the other three. He's a high volume passer in a high passing era in the most favorable conditions to it. Like the Todd Helton of football. An all time great at home, and a 91.9 rating on the road.
A lot of quarterbacks play home games in domes; not a lot of quarterbacks do what Brees is doing. And yeah, he throws a lot, but at a very high efficiency; he's fifth all-time in ANY/A and first in completion percentage.

(Worth mentioning: when Michael Thomas was named to the Pro Bowl last year, he became the first WR for Brees to achieve that honor. It's not like he has a Julio or Moss or Antonio Brown to throw to)

A 102.6 rating in dome, where he plays most of his games, and a 90.9 rating outside.
This figure is distorted because he was bad his first couple years in the league and he played basically 100% outdoor games during this time period. He actually has more outdoor than dome games for his career, but his San Diego years represent about 45% of that outdoor figure.

The other thing is - Brees has skins on the wall. The dude won a Super Bowl - FOR THE SAINTS. Pre-2006 the Saints were every bit as much a laughingstock as the Browns are today. People talk about the Patriots pre-Kraft but it is no comparison. NO didn't win their first playoff game until 2000 - when the franchise was 34 years old. They have 8 playoff wins as a franchise and Brees has 7 of them. He is not a hollow stat compiler. I don't put him on the level of Brady or Manning but I'm the opposite of you - I think the gap is smaller than most suppose.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,598
n dome games for his career, but his San Diego years represent about 45% of that outdoor figure.

The other thing is - Brees has skins on the wall. The dude won a Super Bowl - FOR THE SAINTS. Pre-2006 the Saints were every bit as much a laughingstock as the Browns are today. People talk about the Patriots pre-Kraft but it is no comparison. NO didn't win their first playoff game until 2000 - when the franchise was 34 years old. They have 8 playoff wins as a franchise and Brees has 7 of them. He is not a hollow stat compiler. I don't put him on the level of Brady or Manning but I'm the opposite of you - I think the gap is smaller than most suppose.

I'll take Brees over Manning all day
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
This figure is distorted because he was bad his first couple years in the league and he played basically 100% outdoor games during this time period. He actually has more outdoor than dome games for his career, but his San Diego years represent about 45% of that outdoor figure.
Lol, you’re coming out all cherry guns a blazing, now. Which SD seasons should we throw out to eliminate the distortion? Surely not 2004, where he had a 103.4 rating outdoors. Should we cut his prime years in NO from 2008-2013, where he had a 91.3 rating outdoors? 90.9 is not a distortion, it’s a fair representation of his career performance outdoors.

There’s an enormous differential between his home/road and indoor/outdoor performance. It’s not a coincidence. He and Kurt Warner can wear their jackets, but you can’t make me invite them to my dinner.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The other thing is - Brees has skins on the wall. The dude won a Super Bowl - FOR THE SAINTS. Pre-2006 the Saints were every bit as much a laughingstock as the Browns are today. People talk about the Patriots pre-Kraft but it is no comparison. NO didn't win their first playoff game until 2000 - when the franchise was 34 years old. They have 8 playoff wins as a franchise and Brees has 7 of them. He is not a hollow stat compiler. I don't put him on the level of Brady or Manning but I'm the opposite of you - I think the gap is smaller than most suppose.
That may not be the half of it. If Mia goes Brees over Culpepper, Nick Saban may still be in Miami. Arguably, there is no more consequential figure in football — college AND professional — over the last decade than Drew Brees.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Lol, you’re coming out all cherry guns a blazing, now. Which SD seasons should we throw out to eliminate the distortion? Surely not 2004, where he had a 103.4 rating outdoors. Should we cut his prime years in NO from 2008-2013, where he had a 91.3 rating outdoors? 90.9 is not a distortion, it’s a fair representation of his career performance outdoors.
I'm not cherry-picking; I'm providing context. Football statistics are not large samples and not evenly distributed because of the schedule. You are noting, rightly and fairly, that Brees has played a lot of indoors. I am noting, rightly and fairly, that his pre-breakout years in San Diego disproportionately factor into his outdoor stats. I have not cherry-picked, mostly because I haven't done the math, but he wasn't the same quarterback in 2002 or 2003 as he is now and he played 26 outdoor games in those two seasons (plus 1 dome game in which he was also terrible). Throwing out those two years wouldn't close the gap but I wouldn't be surprised if it makes his career outdoor stats look a lot better, more in the 95 rating neighborhood.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm inclined to give all these guys passes on their rough seasons early and late. Manning's numbers look even better if you throw out his rookie year.
 
Last edited:

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
36,921
Hingham, MA
Who stays at the higher level for longer?

Brees or Brady?
Brees' attempts were way down in 2017 due to their incredible running game, as mentioned above. Will be interesting to see how that plays out over the next couple years. As we saw with Elway, Manning, etc., it is a great way to protect your aging QB. That may help Brees.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,180
Brees' attempts were way down in 2017 due to their incredible running game, as mentioned above. Will be interesting to see how that plays out over the next couple years. As we saw with Elway, Manning, etc., it is a great way to protect your aging QB. That may help Brees.
His sacks (20) were also down dramatically compared to the 28.5 he had averaged the previous 7 seasons. Certainly another benefit.

Where can I get my DB9 cookbook?
 

Schnerres

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2009
1,554
Germany
It´s hypothetical, but:


If Brees plays in an open stadium for his entire career, does he have better career outdoor numbers?
Like: Does the difference from playing home/road games indoor and then going outdoor is bigger and then disrupts him more? And if he played in an outdoor stadium for an extended time/3+ seasons he would be able to adjust better to those conditions, as he is an all-time top10 qb?
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,506
Maine
So playing in San Diego now constitutes facing adverse weather, and is somehow comparative to playing Home Games in NE or GB?

I think Brees is @ top 5 all time QB, but arguing that playing in SD some how is the reason for his outdoor game discrepancy is crazy. Brees also gets to play in TB, ATL, and Carolina every year. Some tough elements there.

It might be a SSS but what are his stats against outdoor "winter" teams?
For instance games @ GB, Cleve, Both NYs, NE, Philly, Chi, Buff, and Clev?

There was a reason that Fouts also put up great numbers long before there were many domes.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
Is it really being seriously disputed that Brees has received an enormous statistical benefit from playing half of his games in a dome? The outdoor numbers are being cited not to show that he's a "bad" QB outdoors, or that those numbers represent his "true" talent as a QB. It's just fair to say, IMO, that a proper evaluation of his "true" performance would be a couple of points closer to his outdoor rating than his unadjusted indoor rating. And that with a reasonable discount, he remains a great QB, but not an inner-circle guy.

FWIW, the simple average of the leaguewide road passer ratings for the last six seasons is 83.91. For dome teams, their opponents' ratings for those seasons: New Orleans: 94.43; Houston: 88.3; Detroit: 92.01; Indy: 93.55; STL (final 6 seasons, not apples-to-apples, but leaguewide away ratings were below 81 in 2010-11): 88.0. Minnesota (likewise counting 2010 and 2011, and excluding 14 and 15 when they played outdoors): 88.38. Every one of these teams has allowed road QB ratings at least 4 points and as much 10 or 11 above the leaguewide average (which itself is brought up by these teams). In three of the last six seasons, NO has allowed road QB ratings of over 102. I don't know how that can be ignored or glossed over.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Is it really being seriously disputed that Brees has received an enormous statistical benefit from playing half of his games in a dome?
A benefit? Yes. Enormous, I wouldn't say so. Significant, I would probably agree with.

The outdoor numbers are being cited not to show that he's a "bad" QB outdoors, or that those numbers represent his "true" talent as a QB. It's just fair to say, IMO, that a proper evaluation of his "true" performance would be a couple of points closer to his outdoor rating than his unadjusted indoor rating. And that with a reasonable discount, he remains a great QB, but not an inner-circle guy.
I don't dispute any of this, though I guess it depends where we draw the line for "inner-circle."

FWIW, the simple average of the leaguewide road passer ratings for the last six seasons is 83.91. For dome teams, their opponents' ratings for those seasons: New Orleans: 94.43; Houston: 88.3; Detroit: 92.01; Indy: 93.55; STL (final 6 seasons, not apples-to-apples, but leaguewide away ratings were below 81 in 2010-11): 88.0. Minnesota (likewise counting 2010 and 2011, and excluding 14 and 15 when they played outdoors): 88.38. Every one of these teams has allowed road QB ratings at least 4 points and as much 10 or 11 above the leaguewide average (which itself is brought up by these teams). In three of the last six seasons, NO has allowed road QB ratings of over 102. I don't know how that can be ignored or glossed over.
The obvious reason for NO's opponents having huge numbers at NO is that the Saints defense has been putrid most of that span. Over the past six years, they allowed a 92.5 passer rating at home - and 95.7 on the road.

(FWIW, Arizona, like Houston and Indy, has a retractable roof, and they did have a better-than-average pass D at home in that span. And for completeness, Dallas also has a retractable roof, Atlanta also has a dome, and both have terrible defenses).

Upthread you said that "playing in a dome is worth on average about 4 points of passer rating." I don't know where you got that information, but I don't find it unreasonable (nor do I find that it downgrades Brees a whole lot). So I'm not really sure where you're going here with digging into individual dome team performances. Are you implying that the Saints dwell in an especially passer-friendly environment?
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
The obvious reason for NO's opponents having huge numbers at NO is that the Saints defense has been putrid most of that span. Over the past six years, they allowed a 92.5 passer rating at home - and 95.7 on the road.
Where are you getting those numbers? I have them at 90.49 allowed on the road in the past six years.

(FWIW, Arizona, like Houston and Indy, has a retractable roof, and they did have a better-than-average pass D at home in that span. And for completeness, Dallas also has a retractable roof, Atlanta also has a dome, and both have terrible defenses).

***

So I'm not really sure where you're going here with digging into individual dome team performances. Are you implying that the Saints dwell in an especially passer-friendly environment?
I went into individual team performances to try and foreclose the very thing you went and did - making unpersuasive claims about the quality of individual team defenses that just happen to be dome teams. And I tried to exclude retractable roofs for the reason you would assume I'd excluded retractable roofs - being open 1/3 of the time eliminates the consistent environment that makes consideration of domes, domes.

As to whether I think the Superdome is a particularly passer friendly dome, I certainly don't exclude the possibility. If you care to do the work, you can go ahead and try to establish James-style park indices as football-ref roughly attempted to do before the 2009 season. They lumped together all domes and established an adjustment of .4 yards per attempt in domes. You could certainly do the math on a park by park basis, including more recent data, and incorporating TD and INT adjustments.

FWIW, at that time, after the downward weather adjustment, Brees went from 26th to 34th on their alltime ranking, Brady rose from 21st to 15th. As far as I know they haven't attempted to do similar work since.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/indexb0ec.html?p=3520
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Where are you getting those numbers? I have them at 90.49 allowed on the road in the past six years.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=combined&year_min=2012&year_max=2017&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&game_location=R&team_id=nor&c5val=1.0&order_by=pass_cmp_opp

I went into individual team performances to try and foreclose the very thing you went and did - making unpersuasive claims about the quality of individual team defenses that just happen to be dome teams.
In the Saints' case, at least, it's pretty persuasive; they've been friggin' garbage. :)

And I tried to exclude retractable roofs for the reason you would assume I'd excluded retractable roofs - being open 1/3 of the time eliminates the consistent environment that makes consideration of domes, domes.
You didn't, though - Indy and Houston have retractable roofs but you included them.

As to whether I think the Superdome is a particularly passer friendly dome, I certainly don't exclude the possibility. If you care to do the work, you can go ahead and try to establish James-style park indices as football-ref roughly attempted to do before the 2009 season. They lumped together all domes and established an adjustment of .4 yards per attempt in domes. You could certainly do the math on a park by park basis, including more recent data, and incorporating TD and INT adjustments.

FWIW, at that time, after the downward weather adjustment, Brees went from 26th to 34th on their alltime ranking, Brady rose from 21st to 15th. As far as I know they haven't attempted to do similar work since.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/indexb0ec.html?p=3520
Interesting, but I don't see any individual stadium park adjustments in the methodology you link to (weather is here BTW). I'm not sure the sample sizes would allow such a thing, honestly - you're dealing not only with imbalanced numbers of domes games but also uneven opponent schedules. It's a hairy mess. Baseball is much easier because you have a much more even slate of opponents and a much larger sample of games.

I'm pretty skeptical that the Superdome is some special area for quarterbacks. It's not like the Saints have a history of excellent signal-callers (quite the opposite) and they've actually had some very good defenses in the past - 20092013 most recently, and they had the #1 scoring D in '92 and '93 FWIW.

EDIT to correct year above.
 
Last edited:

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
Interesting, but I don't see any individual stadium park adjustments in the methodology you link to (weather is here BTW).
Yes, as I said, "If you care to do the work, you can go ahead and try to establish James-style park indices as football-ref roughly attempted to do before the 2009 season. They lumped together all domes and established an adjustment of .4 yards per attempt in domes. You could certainly do the math on a park by park basis, including more recent data, and incorporating TD and INT adjustments."

Let's look at domes first. Since 1996, when the Rams moved into their dome, the Rams, Colts, Falcons, Saints, Lions, and Vikings have played all their home games indoors. So I looked at games played by those teams from 1996--2008. Just to be completely sure I was comparing the same set of teams in both situations, I limited the sample to intra-division games (and I ignored intra-division games between two dome teams, like Lions-Vikings). So the 2008 Titans, for instance, will be included in this data set precisely twice: once in the dome and once in Tennessee. And that's the whole point: every single team that's included will be included exactly twice, once on each side of the ledger. The 2008 Colts, of course, will be included four times, but precisely the same number of times and against precisely the same defenses, on each side of the ledger. Here are the results:

In domes: 7.15 yards per attempt
Same teams / same opponents playing outdoors: 6.76 yards per attempt
Difference: .39 yards per attempt
And whether they've had a history of great QBs or had some good defenses is not really the point of park factors, which just say what they say, i.e. how the performance of the Saints and their opponents at the Superdome compare against the performance of the Saints and their opponents elsewhere. Of course you can have good defenses or bad offenses in an offense-friendly park. You have been a Red Sox fan, right? Haven't you seen some of both over the years?
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Yes, as I said, "If you care to do the work, you can go ahead and try to establish James-style park indices as football-ref roughly attempted to do before the 2009 season. They lumped together all domes and established an adjustment of .4 yards per attempt in domes. You could certainly do the math on a park by park basis, including more recent data, and incorporating TD and INT adjustments."
They lumped them together for a reason. If you try to disaggregate into individual stadiums, you're going to end up with small samples, and worse, small sample sizes that are asymmetric. This is a whale of a data problem.

And whether they've had a history of great QBs or had some good defenses is not really the point of park factors, which just say what they say, i.e. how the performance of the Saints and their opponents at the Superdome compare against the performance of the Saints and their opponents elsewhere. Of course you can have good defenses or bad offenses in an offense-friendly park. You have been a Red Sox fan, right? Haven't you seen some of both over the years?
Sure. My point is: if you suggested pre-2006 that the Superdome was a terrific QB environment, you would have been laughed out of the building. I think what you're seeing is largely distortion from having a great QB.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
They lumped them together for a reason. If you try to disaggregate into individual stadiums, you're going to end up with small samples, and worse, small sample sizes that are asymmetric. This is a whale of a data problem.
Fine. Don't do the work if you doubt its value. But what is your actual point? Domes provide a significant advantage. If you want to remain confident the Superdome is no more friendly than another dome, more power to you. But one of those domes is the one Drew Brees has played half of his games, and put up a disproportionate share of his good numbers.

Sure. My point is: if you suggested pre-2006 that the Superdome was a terrific QB environment, you would have been laughed out of the building. I think what you're seeing is largely distortion from having a great QB.
Why on earth would someone laugh you out of the building for saying a dome is a terrific QB environment? Everyone knows this to be true, and every way in which one attempts to measure this innate belief supports it being true. But I can't keep going down this road with you. You win. Brees' overall numbers are distorted because he used to be young, and the Superdome's numbers are distorted because the Saints used to be bad.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,007
Mansfield MA
Fine. Don't do the work if you doubt its value.
I don't see you chomping at the bit to do it either.

If you want to remain confident the Superdome is no more friendly than another dome, more power to you.
It's not so much that I'm confident as that I have no reason to think otherwise.

Why on earth would someone laugh you out of the building for saying a dome is a terrific QB environment? Everyone knows this to be true, and every way in which one attempts to measure this innate belief supports it being true.
Domes are advantageous QB environments. I was talking specifically about some effect unique to the Superdome above and beyond the normal dome advantage.

But I can't keep going down this road with you.
Yes, I kind of hoped we would get into stories about how hilariously terrible the Saints used to be. This is a classic (committed by the only non-Brees Saints QB to win a playoff game):

 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
I don't see you chomping at the bit to do it either.
Well, since the conversation started with a complaint that Brees is "never mentioned in the conversation of greatest all time QBs," and continued with your gripe that "Brees hardly came up in MVP talk" last year, I'd say the burden's on you to win the hearts and minds of the people, not me.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,943
NH
Sure. My point is: if you suggested pre-2006 that the Superdome was a terrific QB environment, you would have been laughed out of the building. I think what you're seeing is largely distortion from having a great QB.
Uh, why? Before 2006 their quarterbacks were losers like Aaron Brooks and Bobby Hebert.

It seems pretty straight forward that a dome that has no risk of adverse wind or precipitation conditions is going to benefit QB a great deal. It's not about the average game. It's that Brees doesn't ever need to worry about playing in conditions that teams like the Pats / Bills / Bengals/ Packers / etc need to a couple times a year. It's also easy to game plan a team around throwing it 40 times a game when you can just look at the schedule and have 100% confidence the conditions won't be a factor.