Formerly an amalgam of passing accuracy, yardage, TDs and INTs, the rating was only useful in gross comparisons between quarterbacks. But in most arguments, people simply turn to TD-INT ratio, rather than warping their minds around an arbitrary rating system. TD-INT ratio, at a glance, establishes that (for example) despite Jay Cutler's high volume of yards, he's a shitty quarterback.
Good news! The rating system is still arbitrary, but now it's a shitload more complicated. At least they got it into a scale of 100. The NFL is being colonized by the nerds, and it begins with the new Total Quarterback Rating.They threw in a lot more details, but the main innovation is in deciding the "worth" of any given pass. A three yards pass on first down in the first quarter is meaningless. A three yard pass on 3rd and 2 in the 4th quarter is meaningful. Suck on that, Stan Gable.
Despite its "Total" inclusiveness, they left out things like the quality of the defense. It's a slippery slope, because then the nerds would have to come up with a new stat for measuring defenses. With sabermetric moneyball-type stats such as DVOA (fuck if I know or care), the nerds are cramming advanced "metrics" into every nook and cranny of a game which actually is still determined by blocking and tackling.
Using the new Total Quarterback Rating, we learn that Jay Cutler is a shitty quarterback. Thanks for the update, nerds. The main reason for the new statistic lies in its detailed complexity, which no coach could ever calculate. That means that more nerds will have to be employed by every team, and they'll be working overtime.No one ever said nerds weren't smart.
2 comments:
I get the feeling you did not watch the ESPN Hour Special debuting said new metric.
I do like the idea of a pass that hits a receiver's hands, and gets shot up into the air, and then intercepted, as not counting against the QB. That was unfair! And it happens all the time!
The fact that ESPN needed an hour-long show to explain one fucking statistic illustrates my point.
And if we're going to parse the crap out of this ... what if the pass was behind the WR, and that's why it bounced off his hands? Or the WR ran the wrong route? Or the QB read the progression/coverage wrong? Or the QB threw it too goddamn hard? Who is going to determine which throw is "too hard" or if the throw was "too far behind?"
This trying to quantify something which is actually a judgement is akin to the chains measuring out a potential first down to the hundredth of an inch ... even though the ball was spotted almost at random by the umpire.
I don't really care and I won't resist, but I am internally obligated to call BULLSHIT when I smell it.
Post a Comment