True Quarterback value
Justacommeman
Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭
Ok over the past 48 hours I've consulted with NASA, a tarot card reader and my barber. It is confirmed that the QB position is worth 27% of the teams value. If you don't believe me you are going to have to fight me. FWIW Tom Brady is worth 27% + 7 Super Bowl Rings so that's
what like 34%
I'm glad we got that cleared up
Oh unsolicited they said Mitch Tribisky sucks
m
Walker Proof Digital Album
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
2
Comments
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
I don't know the answer but I have a feeling that a certain football team in L.A. is going to find out what it is. The hard way.
All I know is it was nice to see Horry being so welcoming to Brady now that he's joined the 7 championship club.
I am so glad we have this figured out now. I was losing sleep
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Records owned by Brady
Regular games started (299)
Regular season wins by a starting quarterback (230)
Most passing yards, regular season and playoffs (91,653)
Most passing touchdowns, regular season (581)
Most passing touchdowns, postseason included (664)
Most touchdowns thrown to different receivers (77)
Game-winning drives, postseason included (62)
Division titles (17)
Playoff games started (45)
Playoff wins (34)
Playoff touchdown passes (83)
Playoff passing yards (12,449)
Super Bowl appearances (10)
Super Bowl wins (7)
Super Bowl MVPs (5)
Super Bowl touchdown passes (21)
Super Bowl passing yards (3,039)
Highest winning percentage all-time all sports
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm tired of striking through already and these are all so stupidly laughable for reasons well documented elsewhere, I won't bother.
Infinite Homerism, congrats!
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
not sure why all those super bowl records are so laughable. oh, maybe you meant they are laughable in the sense that there has never been a player even in the same ballpark of achieving those standards. I get it now.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Stat nerds cant handle post season . Their inner sheldon cooper is offended by the concept of an incomplete data set.
The fact that a majority doesnt get in and the ones that do all have different numbers of games played sets off the ocd batsignal
As we have seen, it seems that an elite qb takes a team to consistent wins for many many years, no matter who else is on the roster. There are a least a dozen that can be named that fit this scenario over the past couple decades. Then we have qbs that consistently are average over many years in terms on W-L, and then those that simply don't win. Is it the system they play in, or is it them? I am thinking both, but, the qb is the most important position in the game, and makes or breaks the team is what I think this shows. Hence, worth more that 27% and I'd say 50% or more. And, I worked for NASA for 8 years so did not have to consult them .
Best, SH
yeah, thats it bronco2078. I have long thought that playoff stats should be considered much more valuable than regular season stats. I mean, the playoffs are more important than the regular season.
as to the inequity of not all players having the same opportunity to be in the playoffs, well, life is not fair. It was a great disappointment of mine that Dan Marino only ever made it to one SB. he was the best thrower I ever saw. those are the breaks though.
guys like Montana and Brady had the good fortune to have played the equivalent of a season or more in the playoffs.
I really think the statistics they put up and how deep and how successful each playoff trip was for them to be added to the equation of greatness. it is all a big package to me. I don't only look at SB victories, or playoff stats, but I do include them in my analysis
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I am at least glad you are giving more points of view to refute Dallas's and LarkinCollectors claims of Gene Tenace having more value toward winning than Tom Brady, because you know, 'math'.
Very nice
LarkinCollector and Dallasactury put it at 5% based on math, by simply dividing the number of players on the team, and allocating a percentage to each player based on how many times the said player touches the ball. Their math puts Brady at 5% worth of wins. Ironically, that same math gives Gene Tenace a higher percent of wins in his sport, than Tom Brady in his. As a result, they tell me I don't understand math, because my 'sports senses' tell me otherwise.
They completely ignore the impact/complexity/difficulty of the role of QB compared to other positions, and the difficulty finding a league average or viable replacement(compared to other positions), and don't take any of that into account in their 'math'. That is not even considering the extreme difficulty finding an elite level NFL QB.
Since they took those liberties of eliminating that context, then doing the same, when you look at the math of New England when Tom Brady was QB and compare it to the Math of when he wasn't, it comes out to:
New England WP% with Brady is .773
New England WP% without Brady is .416.
You know, math.
NE number of Playoff wins Brady 30
NE number of Playoff wins without Brady 0.
You know, math. Simple math, like they simply dividing up the number of baseball players on a team and allocated a percentage and then did the same with the football team and came up with Gene Tenace having a higher percentage value in wins over Tom Brady.
Then Tom went on to WIN 11 games with Tampa and another Super Bowl.
Those stats are for people that cant evalute players by watching the game .
No regular fan needs to evalute players except by watching the game though.
The only games that matter are the ones you watch , unless you own a team or earn a living from sport in some way .
trying to figure out who did more to win a game you didnt watch is pointless .
Sport is for playing personally or watching in the moment , graph paper is not needed
It took awhile, but now that you've admitted you didn't watch the Super Bowl, don't you feel better? Like a weight has been lifted from your shoulders? But you picked a good game to miss, it was a yawner. The Bucs could have played Uncle Rico at QB and still won, that's how badly KC's offense was outplayed by TB's defense. Ask anyone who watched the game, they'll tell you the same thing.
Gretzky has 60. And they’ve stood for 22 years since he retired.