Tracking the rookie QBs

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,624
I get it. But that throw was actually in a good spot for Agholor to catch it. But he didn't.

I didn't say it wasn't Mac's fault. I'm pointing out that it was a ball that was in Agholor's hands - albeit a tough catch - that got tipped into an INT. Lots of times that pass gets knocked to the ground or is even caught by the receiver.
I agree that Agholor could have made a better play there. Mac was either throwing the ball or getting sacked for a big loss, which likely would have ended the drive in a punt anyway; it was 3rd-and-10 when the pass was thrown, and Agholor was in a good position to make the ensuing tackle on the return.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
I get it. But that throw was actually in a good spot for Agholor to catch it. But he didn't.

I didn't say it wasn't Mac's fault. I'm pointing out that it was a ball that was in Agholor's hands - albeit a tough catch - that got tipped into an INT. Lots of times that pass gets knocked to the ground or is even caught by the receiver.
I mean sure. The point is, he made the throw, it got picked, that's how picks work in the NFL. We shouldn't caveat his stats with that unless you also plan to say "oh but also he hit TB defenders right in the chest with a couple throws that they dropped".
The use of "oh they are tipped" is meant to argue that they don't count... they do count, and a tipped throw usually means it was a borderline or bad throw, there is the occasional play like the Jonnu one where an open guy makes a horrific mistake, but most tips happen (like this one) because it's a tough throw into coverage and it's high, that's always a dangerous throw, I don't mind pointing the Jonnu one out, but in general it has felt like there is a rush to excuse every negative play with Mac, and that does nobody any good in assessing him going forward.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,229
I mean sure. The point is, he made the throw, it got picked, that's how picks work in the NFL. We shouldn't caveat his stats with that unless you also plan to say "oh but also he hit TB defenders right in the chest with a couple throws that they dropped".
The use of "oh they are tipped" is meant to argue that they don't count... they do count, and a tipped throw usually means it was a borderline or bad throw, there is the occasional play like the Jonnu one, and I don't mind pointing that one out, but in general it has felt like there is a rush to excuse every negative play with Mac, and that does nobody any good in assessing him going forward.
I keep score for myself on Zach Wilson’s interceptions so I think it is only natural for Pats fans to do the same with Mac. The stats are the stats, but once they happen, they are historical stats. If in my mind I’m trying to project what I think the rookie will become I’m discounting those.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
1,446
He's made some dangrous throws, for sure.
Between the recovered fumbles and the near pick 6 on the Agholor come backer, I'd say the 4 picks he's thrown are a fair representation of his performance even if 1+ weren't his fault at all. He's been solid with ball security and not making awful decisions, but definitely not perfect.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,672
Worcester
Yah- that pass to Agholor... I know Collinsworth put the blame on N.A., but that ball seemed to take forever to get there. But of course, I thought the same thing on the Brady-Hogan catch that was also a near pick-6 (was that in OT in LI? )

edit- it was... around 13:50 left in OT.
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
He threw high over the middle, if Agholor doesn't tip it, it goes over his head to the waiting safety. He's under pressure, but he's still throwing high down the middle to a guy in tight coverage with safety help.

Mac has played pretty well for a rookie, but people need to stop excusing his poor plays as "not his fault", he made the throw, it was a dangerous one, it got picked, he's made mistakes, he's a rookie. I'm sure if you go through the tape plenty of the poor plays by the other rookies could be explained away the same way.
It was third and ten and the alternative was taking a sack. They weren't in field goal range. I want Jones to make the "dangerous" decision there. The maybe ten yards extra they'd get on a punt are not nearly valuable enough to outweigh the potential value of Agholor managing to compete the catch there. The only difference between taking a sack and throwing that pick is a small amount of field position on average.

I sure fucking hope he doesn't start surrendering every third and long because he might throw a pick down field. One of his worst plays was when he took that early down sack late in the game against the Saints.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,939
Philadelphia
I agree that Agholor could have made a better play there. Mac was either throwing the ball or getting sacked for a big loss, which likely would have ended the drive in a punt anyway; it was 3rd-and-10 when the pass was thrown, and Agholor was in a good position to make the ensuing tackle on the return.
Yeah, that's the biggest thing with this throw. It was a dangerous throw but it was actually both the correct read on the play and a pretty good risk-reward gamble given the situation. You end up with a 24 yard punt but the alternatives are taking a big sack or a throwaway that probably ends up called as grounding given he was in the pocket. Its not a turnover that changes possession and once you factor that likely lost yardage plus a ~40 yard net on the punt, the yardage differential isn't that big either. And most importantly you have a genuine chance to complete the pass and keep the possession going now in scoring position.

It was the correct read and actually I think a pretty decent throw under the circumstances. More than anything, it was a great defensive play and you tip your cap. 9 times out of 10 that trail technique defender will not get his head around, instantly locate the football, and be able to break up that pass.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
It was third and ten and the alternative was taking a sack. They weren't in field goal range. I want Jones to make the "dangerous" decision there. The maybe ten yards extra they'd get on a punt are not nearly valuable enough to outweigh the potential value of Agholor managing to compete the catch there. The only difference between taking a sack and throwing that pick is a small amount of field position on average.

I sure fucking hope he doesn't start surrendering every third and long because he might throw a pick down field. One of his worst plays was when he took that early down sack late in the game against the Saints.
I'm not saying he shouldn't take that chance, it's a dangerous throw, but one that made sense. I'm pointing out that listing out the stats of the rookie QBs then saying "oh well 2 of those Mac picks were tipped" isn't useful. I mean I'm sure if we look at the film a bunch of the picks by other guys were game situation dependent too. The stats are the stats, and picking which ones to ignore to make our guy look better in comparison to others is dumb.
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
I'm not saying he shouldn't take that chance, it's a dangerous throw, but one that made sense. I'm pointing out that listing out the stats of the rookie QBs then saying "oh well 2 of those Mac picks were tipped" isn't useful. I mean I'm sure if we look at the film a bunch of the picks by other guys were game situation dependent too. The stats are the stats, and picking which ones to ignore to make our guy look better in comparison to others is dumb.
Sure. And for what it's worth, PFF has Mac's Turnover-Worthy Play percentage, which I think includes both should-be-interceptions and fumbles, at 2.7%, tied with Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, and Jalen Hurts. Patrick Mahomes is at 2.9%.

Fields is at 4.0%, Lawrence and Wilson (and Tua) at 5.4%, and Davis Mills at 6.9%.

Stats are stats, and TWPs are stats. There's some subjectivity with it, but that's not actually an inherently bad thing, particularly if you're trying to measure process rather than outcome.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,178
Updated totals:

Jones: 135/190, 71.1%, 1243 yards, 5/5 TD/INT, 86.4 rating

Lawrence: 104/175, 59.4%, 1146 yards, 6/8 TD/INT, 71.3 rating

Wilson: 98/171, 57.3%, 1117 yards, 4/9 TD/INT, 62.9 rating

Fields: 37/72, 51.4%, 458 yards, 1/2 TD/INT, 64.5 rating

Lance: 25/48, 52.1%, 354 yards, 3/1 TD/INT, 88.4 rating

Mills: 59/96, 61.5%, 669 yards, 5/5 TD/INT, 78.0 rating
 
Last edited:

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
12,916
Not a first rounder, I know, but a couple of more games like he had yesterday and we’re going to have to add Davis Mills to this list.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
10,263
I know some of it is a function of the short passes he’s being asked to throw, but 71% completion percentage still seems incredible for a rookie. Lotta poise in that kid.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I know some of it is a function of the short passes he’s being asked to throw, but 71% completion percentage still seems incredible for a rookie. Lotta poise in that kid.
Cam completed 69% of his passes last year, so to me that by itself is almost meaningless. What has impressed me is his ball placement. On a lot of those slants yesterday the receiver was wide open, but he put the ball on the perfect spot to both protect the guy and maximize YAC. It's crucial for a guy who likes to operate short to have that sort of command of the ball so you always extract as many yards as possible from those throws. I don't think he'll ever be the kind of guy who misses the easy throw, and that's very valuable in this league (just look at Zach Wilson).

I'm still a little concerned about the arm, I think the ball tends to die on him a little bit on longer throws and the more mustard he puts on the ball, the more scattershot the accuracy gets, especially if he has to put it on a line. But I also believe arm strength is improvable and he'll likely show up to camp next year much better in that department.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,298
Updated totals:

Jones: 135/190, 71.1%, 1243 yards, 5/5 TD/INT, 86.4 rating

Lawrence: 104/175, 59.4%, 1146 yards, 6/8 TD/INT, 71.3 rating

Wilson: 98/171, 57.3%, 1117 yards, 4/9 TD/INT, 62.9 rating

Fields: 37/72, 51.4%, 458 yards, 1/2 TD/INT, 64.5 rating

Lance: 25/48, 52.1%, 354 yards, 3/1 TD/INT, 88.4 rating

Mills: 59/96, 61.5%, 669 yards, 5/5 TD/INT, 78.0 rating
A more complete comparison would also include sacks and rushing. Fields in particular has a horrific 16.3% sack rate, which has been a big part of his struggles (getting sacked 1/6th of the time is a problem). And a big part of Lance's value has come from his legs, he has 27 carries for 133 yards so far.

Also, yeesh, none of these guys have been very good. Of the 31 QBs with enough attempts to qualify, the 5 rookies are all ranked in the bottom 6, along with Jacoby Brissett (Lance doesn't have enough attempts yet to qualify, but he'd rank 17th if he did).
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,939
Philadelphia
It is very very early and definitely far too early to be drawing any conclusions. But the struggles with accuracy (at least as proxied by completion percentage) from the non-Macs is surprising enough to be worth watching. Highly drafted QBs have actually been pretty good in this regard in recent years - Baker, Tua, Kyler, Burrow, and Herbert were all between 64-67% their rookie years. Jones, Watson, and Wentz all were around 62%. Since 2016 the only highly drafted QBs below 60% their rookie years have been Goff, Trubitsky, Allen, Darnold, and Rosen. Obviously there is plenty of time to bring these numbers up and the sample sizes for Fields and Lance remain tiny.
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
A more complete comparison would also include sacks and rushing. Fields in particular has a horrific 16.3% sack rate, which has been a big part of his struggles (getting sacked 1/6th of the time is a problem). And a big part of Lance's value has come from his legs, he has 27 carries for 133 yards so far.
You're more than welcome to augment :)
EPA/play would include those. Sacks, rushes, passes, etc, all rolled into one.

Fields: -0.198 (33rd)
Wilson: -0.197 (32nd)
Mills: -0.067 (31st)
Lawrence: -0.042 (30th)
Lance: -0.012 (27th)
Jones: 0.091 (23rd)

And here are some various PFF grades, all differences in sample size caveats included:
Rookie QB: Lawrence Wilson Lance Fields Jones Mills
Overall Grade: 50.4 59.4 59.0 54.6 73.5 51.8
Passing Grade: 48.3 57.5 58.4 55.1 71.8 53.1
Grade under pressure: 33 49.2 62.7 24.9 47.9 26.6
Grade when kept clean: 59.5 65.0 58.2 81.7 84.9 71.6


It might just be because he's in Jacksonville and playing for Urban Meyer, and it's only been five games, and caveats and caveats, but I can't help but find that there's something particularly concerning with how Lawrence has been so far. With all the other first rounders, their biggest problems have been exactly what you would have expected coming out of college. Wilson and Lance are raw, inaccurate, often mechanically unsound, and so forth; Fields doesn't make quick decisions, flounders under pressure in various ways, and just generally struggles when it comes to the stuff that happens before the throw; Jones doesn't have elite physical tools. Lawrence, like Jones, was supposed to be easily NFL-ready coming out. It was really the big reason why he was the consensus number one over Fields. I'm really not sure how you could say he has been that so far. But who knows, it's just five games and the Shadow of Meyer is hanging over everything.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,178
Updated totals:

Jones: 150/211, 71.1%, 1472 yards, 7/6 TD/INT, 89.6 rating (passer rating over last 3 games is 103.5)

Lawrence: 129/216, 59.4%, 1465 yards, 7/8 TD/INT, 75.5 rating (passer rating over last 3 games is 93.8)

Wilson: 98/171, 57.3%, 1117 yards, 4/9 TD/INT, 62.9 rating

Fields: 53/99, 53.5%, 632 yards, 2/3 TD/INT, 67.4 rating

Lance: 25/48, 52.1%, 354 yards, 3/1 TD/INT, 88.4 rating

Mills: 88/139, 61.5%, 912 yards, 5/7 TD/INT, 73.2 rating
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
I think we should add ANY/A to the stat line:
Jones: 5.53 (25th)
Lawrence: 5.24 (28th)
Wilson: 3.39 (31st)
Fields: 3.20 (32nd)
Lance: 7.1 (not qualified for rankings, but would be 16th is qualifying)
Mills: 4.04 (30th)

(for those curious the other QBs in the same grouping with the rookies are (26th- Darnold, 27th- Goff, 29th-Brissett)
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
Updated PFF grades for the rookies (min 20% of overall dropbacks to qualify, out of 36):

Jones: 79.7 Overall (15th), 78.3 Passing (13th)
Lawrence: 56.8 Overall (34th), 54.5 Passing (36th)
Wilson: 59.4 Overall (30th), 57.5 (32nd)
Fields: 56.0 Overall (36th), 55.9 (35th)
Lance: 59.0 Overall (31st), 58.4 (29th)
Mills: 56.3 Overall (35th), 56.8 (33rd)
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
Updated PFF grades for the rookies (min 20% of overall dropbacks to qualify, out of 36):

Jones: 79.7 Overall (15th), 78.3 Passing (13th)
Lawrence: 56.8 Overall (34th), 54.5 Passing (36th)
Wilson: 59.4 Overall (30th), 57.5 (32nd)
Fields: 56.0 Overall (36th), 55.9 (35th)
Lance: 59.0 Overall (31st), 58.4 (29th)
Mills: 56.3 Overall (35th), 56.8 (33rd)
I know PFF grades are generally not bad for QBs, but I would LOVE to know what they are doing that they have Mac Jones over Matt Stafford who just about every stat puts as a top 3-5 QB this year.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,178
Updated totals:

Jones: 174/247, 70.4%, 1779 yards, 9/6 TD/INT, 92.8 rating (passer rating over last 4 games is 105.8)

Lawrence: 129/216, 59.4%, 1465 yards, 7/8 TD/INT, 75.5 rating (passer rating over last 3 games is 93.8)

Wilson: 104/181, 57.3%, 1168 yards, 4/9 TD/INT, 63.5 rating

Fields: 75/131, 57.3%, 816 yards, 2/6 TD/INT, 61.8 rating

Lance: 25/48, 52.1%, 354 yards, 3/1 TD/INT, 88.4 rating

Mills: 111/171, 61.5%, 1047 yards, 5/7 TD/INT, 74.4 rating
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,838
This is what we would call an old-fashioned blowout at this point, yes?

Last four games:

31-40 (77.5%), 275 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 101.6 rating, team scores 17 points in the rain vs TB
23-30 (76.7%), 231 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 95.3 rating, team scores 25 points at Hou
15-21 (71.4%), 229 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 118.9 rating, team scores 29 points vs Dal
24-36 (66.7%), 307 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 111.7 rating, team scores 54 points vs NYJ

TOT: 93-127 (73.2%), 1,042 yds, 8.2 y/a, 7 td, 3 int, 105.8 rating, team averaging 31.3 points a game

I'm not sure how much better we expect a rookie QB to play, but he's been damned good for an NFL quarterback, not just a rookie quarterback.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
21,317
Newton
I watched some of that Chicago game yesterday and … dear god did Fields look overmatched. That first pick he threw was just some hopeless chuck downfield right into the arms of the TB defender. Apparently he was told he had a free play in his headset before the snap. Which doesn’t exactly give you confidence that he’s going to get the coaching he needs in year 1 …

To that point, I keep thinking comparing Mac to the other guys in his draft class seems a bit pointless. In part because all these guys are in their first year when most QBs look like crap. Granted, Mac hasn’t but again; that seems at least partly due to coaching – which we all knew was going to be an enormous advantage for him over everybody but maybe Lance (and that hasn’t worked out so well so far). And of course, talented QBs who receive poor or inconsistent instruction early on are more likely to turn into David Carr than Alex Smith – which has to be the biggest worry if you’re on Team Lawrence.

All of which is to say, as fun as it is to see how far ahead Mac compared to the rest of the pack, this just seems like WAY more a reflection of fit and coaching than talent. Which I know others have been saying—and probably matters more when it comes down to winning actual games—but seven games in, it feels like a real thing.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
I watched some of that Chicago game yesterday and … dear god did Fields look overmatched. That first pick he threw was just some hopeless chuck downfield right into the arms of the TB defender. Apparently he was told he had a free play in his headset before the snap. Which doesn’t exactly give you confidence that he’s going to get the coaching he needs in year 1 …

To that point, I keep thinking comparing Mac to the other guys in his draft class seems a bit pointless. In part because all these guys are in their first year when most QBs look like crap. Granted, Mac hasn’t but again; that seems at least partly due to coaching – which we all knew was going to be an enormous advantage for him over everybody but maybe Lance (and that hasn’t worked out so well so far). And of course, talented QBs who receive poor or inconsistent instruction early on are more likely to turn into David Carr than Alex Smith – which has to be the biggest worry if you’re on Team Lawrence.

All of which is to say, as fun as it is to see how far ahead Mac compared to the rest of the pack, this just seems like WAY more a reflection of fit and coaching than talent. Which I know others have been saying—and probably matters more when it comes down to winning actual games—but seven games in, it feels like a real thing.
That's the 2nd of those this year, against GB a guy was offside so they took an end zone shot... no flag, so it was a pick.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
This is what we would call an old-fashioned blowout at this point, yes?

Last four games:

31-40 (77.5%), 275 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 101.6 rating, team scores 17 points in the rain vs TB
23-30 (76.7%), 231 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 95.3 rating, team scores 25 points at Hou
15-21 (71.4%), 229 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 118.9 rating, team scores 29 points vs Dal
24-36 (66.7%), 307 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 111.7 rating, team scores 54 points vs NYJ

TOT: 93-127 (73.2%), 1,042 yds, 8.2 y/a, 7 td, 3 int, 105.8 rating, team averaging 31.3 points a game

I'm not sure how much better we expect a rookie QB to play, but he's been damned good for an NFL quarterback, not just a rookie quarterback.
Yeah, Mac in the last four games has turned it on and has started to play like a net positive and not just "not a negative", which is great to see. Not that "not fucking up" isn't a good quality for a rookie QB to have either, but he's actually made plays of late, now let's see if defenses adjust and if he can adjust back. Couldn't really ask for much more than this from him, though. He's been as good as one could have reasonably expected.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,624
I know PFF grades are generally not bad for QBs, but I would LOVE to know what they are doing that they have Mac Jones over Matt Stafford who just about every stat puts as a top 3-5 QB this year.
It's the problem with a black box methodology that has a ton of subjective judgment. Nobody knows how their grades are calculated, what they mean, or if they are at all repeatable or predictive.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
It's the problem with a black box methodology that has a ton of subjective judgment. Nobody knows how their grades are calculated, what they mean, or if they are at all repeatable or predictive.
We actually do know their grades are predictive of future QB performance. More so than EPA/Play, CPOE or EPA/Play+CPOE composite. Evaluating QB play is a crapshoot and of course there's a ton of subjectivity involved with PFF, but as far as I know they're pretty much the only guys out there charting every single play while trying to adhere to a consistent methodology.

View: https://twitter.com/reinhurdler/status/1440707964243902464?t=MgXAFM6OI4D_aVlh5aSeJw&s=19
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
We actually do know their grades are predictive of future QB performance. More so than EPA/Play, CPOE or EPA/Play+CPOE composite. Evaluating QB play is a crapshoot and of course there's a ton of subjectivity involved with PFF, but as far as I know they're pretty much the only guys out there charting every single play while trying to adhere to a consistent methodology.
That's why I mentioned I know that they do pretty decently (though it's more that all of those aren't that good), but I am curious how it comes up with some things, because they seem to have some wild variations. I know part of it is turnover worthy throws, which I generally think they have done a terrible job defining and charting based on what we can track.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
That's why I mentioned I know that they do pretty decently (though it's more that all of those aren't that good), but I am curious how it comes up with some things, because they seem to have some wild variations. I know part of it is turnover worthy throws, which I generally think they have done a terrible job defining and charting based on what we can track.
I mean, PFF grade generally does paint a similar picture to an amalgam of EPA/Play, ANY/A, QBR and DVOA, so when they vastly undervalue a player based on what those stats show (like Stafford this year) it does raise some eyebrows. Then again, they were low on Mahomes from the second half of last season on and it looks like they ended up being right that he wasn't really playing as well as the numbers suggested. For that reason I'd say let's watch what happens to Stafford and how he's playing at year's end because another factor to be taken into account is that's a system that made Jared Goff look like an MVP candidate.
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
It's the problem with a black box methodology that has a ton of subjective judgment. Nobody knows how their grades are calculated, what they mean, or if they are at all repeatable or predictive.
It's actually hilarious how untrue this is. The predictive part has already been covered, and if you wanna learn how the grades are calculated and what they mean, you can literally go to their website and read all about them. This reminds me of that time a few years back when some congressman was trying to rail the head of the Federal Reserve at a congressional hearing for lacking "transparency," and the Fed chair just went, "all of that information is freely available on our website."
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
It's actually hilarious how untrue this is. The predictive part has already been covered, and if you wanna learn how the grades are calculated and what they mean, you can literally go to their website and read all about them. This reminds me of that time a few years back when some congressman was trying to rail the head of the Federal Reserve at a congressional hearing for lacking "transparency," and the Fed chair just went, "all of that information is freely available on our website."
I mean, it's not a black box, but at the same time... it's "well we break down each play and decide where it lands on a 9 point scale" then "we adjust it based on our assessment of the situation", it's still incredibly squishy and subject to a lot of feel/personal opinion. They also reference that they have rubrics and guides but don't publish them. It's pretty black box compared with statistics in that you couldn't possibly replicate it without those rubrics and guides.

I like PFF, but pretending that how their grades are caluculated is both clear and public is incorrect. It's still a subjective measurement by different people, albeit based on a rubric (which is not public).

Sure their website gives an overview, but it does not tell you how they are calculated really, just the general overview of what they are trying to do.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,939
Philadelphia
Mac has an ANY/A of 6.93 if you take out the New Orleans game.

Of course, that game counts as part of performance and every QB is going to look a lot better if you take out their worst game. But especially with rookies in particular I think sometimes averaging over the entire season doesn't really tell the whole story. Variance in performance just tends to be higher so there is more chance for an outlying stinker to have a lot of impact on a seasonal average. In ANY/A terms, Mac has basically had four decent but not great games, two very strong games (the last two), and one complete catastrophe.

Lawrence's numbers are lower overall but there is a similar story in some sense with him, in that his ANY/A is being affected pretty significantly by a catastrophically bad Denver game.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
Mac has an ANY/A of 6.93 if you take out the New Orleans game.

Of course, that game counts as part of performance and every QB is going to look a lot better if you take out their worst game. But especially with rookies in particular I think sometimes averaging over the entire season doesn't really tell the whole story. Variance in performance just tends to be higher so there is more chance for an outlying stinker to have a lot of impact on a seasonal average. In ANY/A terms, Mac has basically had four decent but not great games, two very strong games (the last two), and one complete catastrophe.

Lawrence's numbers are lower overall but there is a similar story in some sense with him, in that his ANY/A is being affected pretty significantly by a catastrophically bad Denver game.
I think we've started to see the turn for Lawrence and Mac who are breaking out, Wilson before the injury was not. Fields is a few games behind, but I'm not hopeful.. he has a terrible coach/coordinator and he just doesn't look ready. Lance is back to the bench, so who knows.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,672
Worcester
At this point of the season- Mac would be the leader for RPOY amongst QBs. I freely admit that I don't follow other teams much - who would be the other main contenders?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Ja'Mar Chase will win that award going away.
Yup. I think Kyle Pitts could potentially provide some competition if his last two weeks are what we can expect going forward, but at this point Mac would have to lead the Pats to the playoffs while performing like a top 15 QB to sniff that award.
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,726
hoboken
I think we've started to see the turn for Lawrence and Mac who are breaking out, Wilson before the injury was not. Fields is a few games behind, but I'm not hopeful.. he has a terrible coach/coordinator and he just doesn't look ready. Lance is back to the bench, so who knows.
I think Lance’s injury is playing a bigger part here than is being reported. He might only be limited practice this week after 2 weeks out.

I think he’s the starter in 2 weeks. We’ll see.