PFF Accuracy Percentage.

[Dustin]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/10/10/signature-stats-accuracy-percentage/

 

Top and bottom 10. For Colts fans, I believe Luck is 12th, not shown on the list.

[dw49]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/10/10/signature-stats-accuracy-percentage/

 

Top and bottom 10. For Colts fans, I believe Luck is 12th, not shown on the list.

 

 

Problem with that stat or list is that it doesn't take into account throw aways , length of passes , wrong routs run  and duress the QB might be under.

 

As far as our guy is concerned , duress and wrong routes would be a pretty big issue. Seems like we start every game with a lot of "miscommunication between Luck and the receivers. He and Richardson are never on the same page.

 

Manning and Rivers for sure belong there as do many of the others. RG3 in the top 10 is ridiculous. I've seen a lot of his games and a huge number of his completions are little short things in garbage time.

[Le Neon]

Accuracy% = (Completions + Drops) / (Attempts – TA – BP – Spikes – HAT)

 

Completions are corrected for drops, while attempts are corrected for throwaways (TA), batted passes (BP), spikes, and hit as thrown (HAT).

[Dustin]

Problem with that stat or list is that it doesn't take into account throw aways , length of passes , wrong routs run  and duress the QB might be under.

 

As far as our guy is concerned , duress and wrong routes would be a pretty big issue. Seems like we start every game with a lot of "miscommunication between Luck and the receivers. He and Richardson are never on the same page.

 

Manning and Rivers for sure belong there as do many of the others. RG3 in the top 10 is ridiculous. I've seen a lot of his games and a huge number of his completions are little short things in garbage time.

 

They have stats that incorporate all of that (depth of target, passing under pressure, ect....). Also, throwaways are incorporated into here.

 

As for RG3 yes, his numbers are inflated because of garbage time.

[Le Neon]

They have stats that incorporate all of that (depth of target, passing under pressure, ect....). Also, throwaways are incorporated into here.

 

As for RG3 yes, his numbers are inflated because of garbage time.

 

Which is something the much-maligned QBR does an excellent job of accounting for.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

[Blue Horseshoe]

I thought it was all the receiver's fault and that Brady would be perfect except for them.

[Drastik]

Which is something the much-maligned QBR does an excellent job of accounting for.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

QBR is not recognized by the NFL or any other organization because ESPN won't explain what the formula for QBR is or how they calculate it. That's why many people look at QBR as a joke, because no one even knows what QBR represents. 

 

The list is about what I expected, all the QB's who are routinely praised for their accuracy are in the Top 10. The one shocker to me was Tannehill, I havn't watched many of his games so I can't comment on him.

 

In the bottom half of the rankings, we see the names we all expected... guys who routinely throw erratic or overthrown balls. 

[OffensivelyPC]

Which is something the much-maligned QBR does an excellent job of accounting for.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

I'm always amazed at how many people dismiss the stat.  I think it's jsut that they don't understand it and defer to the common refrain that "it's subjective."  It actually isn't as subjective as people make it out ot be.  It uses some of the more predictive stats such as EPA.  EPA is an acceptable stat when used alone, and the only argument against it is the clutch index.  I get that defining clutch moments is the most subjective part of the stat, but when it's applied objectively and equally across all QBs, the subjectivity of the stat is okay by me. 

 

Really, no QB stat that assesses QB play is going to be perfect.  That's why, used in conjunction, they compliment each other.  The traditional passer ratings flaw is that garbage time stats are computed in the stat.  So I really have no problem with Total QBR.  Together, they paint a better picture of a QBs game than if you just used one and not the other.

[Le Neon]

QBR is not recognized by the NFL or any other organization because ESPN won't explain what the formula for QBR is or how they calculate it. That's why many people look at QBR as a joke, because no one even knows what QBR represents. 

 

The list is about what I expected, all the QB's who are routinely praised for their accuracy are in the Top 10. The one shocker to me was Tannehill, I havn't watched many of his games so I can't comment on him.

 

In the bottom half of the rankings, we see the names we all expected... guys who routinely throw erratic or overthrown balls. 

 

Which, IMO, is a terrific validator for the metric. It certainly passes the eye test.  Manning is head and shoulders ahead of the pack.  Luck is terrific.  Brady is having a middling year.  RGIII is rusty so far in spite of his occasionally terrific garbage time fantasy value.

 

Even if the formula was completely transparent only a vanishingly small number of people would take the time to understand it.