Bay Area Writer: Kaepernick One-Read QB, Cam Actually Reads Defenses

[Heiisenberg]

need more than that....

 

for example....completing a pass on 3rd down doesn't mean you converted it.    Could just be a pointless completion that pads stats.

 

also, need to add the number of 3rd downs converted with their legs.

 

I know which one Cam is above.  I also know more goes into it.   Carolina is actually much better offensively if you look at what they do PER DRIVE.  That gets lost in the national picture.  Per drive, Carolina generates better offense than people realize.  They do it b/c they are good on 3rd down....b/c Cam is.

 

Need more? Kap has better numbers on 3rd down, thats the bottom line.  Higher completion %, more touchdowns, less interceptions, less sacks, higher QBR.  The only reason thats "not enough" for you is because it makes Kap look better.  So my statement is true, which refuted yours, and i backed it up with actual real numbers.  You said Cam is better on third, you didnt say Cam is better at converting 3rd down,s you didnt say Panthers have the 4th highest 3rd down efficiency.  You said Cam is better on 3rd down, so this is what i posted to refute that.  And sure, cam is good on 3rd down. Thats not debatable, but Kap simply has played better on 3rd down.   As a team yes carolina converts a higher 3rd down %. but thats not what you said when i refuted your statement, and even though that is the case, its not because cam is necessarily better on 3rd.

 

 

SF averages the 29th most plays per drive.....Carolina averages the 3rd most plays per drive.

 

You need to dig deeper into more stats.  Why do you think the above is true if Kapernick is better on 3rd downs?  Let that marinate for a moment.  More to it than just completion percentage (which actually doesn't tell you anything about converting and doing what you needed done)

49ers dont need a lot of plays to score, looks like carolina does. When you consider how many points each team scores, 49ers avg 25 ppg, carolina 22 ppg. So the 49ers while using less plays per drive, score more points , and are therefore more efficient. 

 

3rd down Completion percentage tells you one thing: how efficient of a passer your qb is on 3rd down.  Kap has a higher percentage, for more yards per pass, more touchdowns, less int, less sacks, and a higher QB rating.  That's pretty substantial set of numbers. And if you want to extrapolate those numbers, objectively speaking looking at those numbers just who do you think is more likely to convert a 3rd down? The guy who averages a lower completion %,  and lower yards per pass?  What if carolina has a substantially higher percentage of 1-2 yard 3rd downs, while the 49ers have a substantially higher 3rd and long to convert? Would that not skew the stat of who converts more 3rd downs? So for this reason its more relevent tl compare what happens on third down regardless of conversion, since 3rd downs vary greatly.

 

Now you are bringing up conversions, a whole other stat you didnt bring up before.  Conversions are another thing, and i already admit as a team carolina converts a higher percentage of 3rd downs. But its not because Cam is better on 3rd down.  There are other factors including rushing, which both teams hand the ball off a lot on short yardage situations. 

 

 

 

more you say?

 

Tell me....if Kapernick is so much better on 3rd down then why do the Panthers have the 4th highest 3rd down efficiency % in the NFL?  You know, actually getting the yardage needed to move the chains?  SF for example is all the way down at 18th.

 

let that marinate for another moment.

 

 

So now you want to talk conversion since it suits your argument, rather than actual 3rd down numbers.  Can you find numbers that show the conversion % of both passing and rushing of the QB alone? No handoffs, no penalties (something the overall statisic includes rather than associating what the individual QB contributes to the conversion).  Not arguing carolina has been better at converting 3rd downs, but i am arguing that its simply because of cam.

[Heiisenberg]

To qualify that i'll even include what both guys have done with their legs on third down.

 

Kap 205 yards 6.6 avg  2 TD

Cam 295 yards 6.0 avg 1 TD

 

So even objectively speaking Kap is more efficient with his legs on 3rd down as well.

 

If you can find numbers of how many 3rd downs were converted with their legs, id like to see it.

[FearTheCats]

Bottom line is Kap is better on 3rd, 4th downs. Hes better on the deep ball. hes better when the game is close whether they are up by 1-8 points, or playing from behind 1-8 points. Kap is more clutch.  

 

Kap is more clutch? Funniest thing I've heard all day. 

[Jangler]

LOL...Seriously? In case you havent read our board over the past week, there have been numerous remarks and side comments about the sexual preference/sly gay joke thrown around. In fact, Zod himself make a similar gesture with a bet to the owner of their board and as a prize giving what...some dildo/ass cream or some other poo gift that basically plays into the stereotype the city has.If you have an issue with how people are treated because of who they are...take it up with the leader of the board who opened that can of worms with that bet.

 

 Leave the guy alone. He may be an opposing fan and of course has a different viewpoint (he supports his qb like we support ours...HUGE surprise there) but he has been at least in this thread respectful..which is a surprise given some of the southern hospitality some have shown him.

 

 

It was a medium but t plu g, and I think he really wanted it.

 

 

fricken censorship!

[CRA]

Um, you fail to realize what being good on 3rd down means.....obviously, you failed to let 3rd down STATS marinate.

 

Being good doesn't = posting stats that tell you NOTHING about converting 3rd downs.

 

Being good on 3rd down....means you are good at converting.

[Heiisenberg]

Kap is more clutch? Funniest thing I've heard all day. 

 

YUP. I backed it up with actual statistics too.  Can you back up your supposition that Cam is more clutch?

 

I posted stats in specific clutch situations: 3rd/4th down #s  overall, and  when its 1-2 yard to go and 3-8 yards to go. Those are clutch situations right?

 

I posted stats on 30+ yard passes, thats  kind of clutch eh?  

 

Anyway, in each of those situations Kap has better numbers, and most of the time has a higher completion %, more yards per pass, more touchdowns, less interceptions and less sacks and a higher QBR.       Sounds to me that if a QB performs better in those situations, he's pretty dang clutch.

[CRA]

To qualify that i'll even include what both guys have done with their legs on third down.

 

Kap 205 yards 6.6 avg  2 TD

Cam 295 yards 6.0 avg 1 TD

 

So even objectively speaking Kap is more efficient with his legs on 3rd down as well.

 

If you can find numbers of how many 3rd downs were converted with their legs, id like to see it.

again, those stats have nothing to do with a conversation about being good at 3rd down.  

 

Give me a second....Cam is freakish on 3rd down with his legs since arriving in the NFL.  Since he arrived in the NFL there are only a couple players (not just QBs, talking RBs) who have converted more on the ground.  

[CRA]

YUP. I backed it up with actual statistics too.  Can you back up your supposition that Cam is more clutch?

 

I posted stats in specific clutch situations: 3rd/4th down #s  overall, and  when its 1-2 yard to go and 3-8 yards to go. Those are clutch situations right?

 

I posted stats on 30+ yard passes, thats  kind of clutch eh?  

 

Anyway, in each of those situations Kap has better numbers, and most of the time has a higher completion %, more yards per pass, more touchdowns, less interceptions and less sacks and a higher QBR.       Sounds to me that if a QB performs better in those situations, he's pretty dang clutch.

 

Stats say....the 49ers aren't good on 3rd down.  

 

Stats say....the Panthers are.

 

Stats say.....Carolina moves the chains well

 

Stats say.....SF....not so much.

 

Your random completion percentages, random yardage....is just that.  Numbers.  Numbers that don't tell what happens.  The stats tell you....tell you CK has trouble moving his O consistently. 

 

 

[CRA]

YUP. I backed it up with actual statistics too.  Can you back up your supposition that Cam is more clutch?

 

I posted stats in specific clutch situations: 3rd/4th down #s  overall, and  when its 1-2 yard to go and 3-8 yards to go. Those are clutch situations right?

 

I posted stats on 30+ yard passes, thats  kind of clutch eh?  

 

Anyway, in each of those situations Kap has better numbers, and most of the time has a higher completion %, more yards per pass, more touchdowns, less interceptions and less sacks and a higher QBR.       Sounds to me that if a QB performs better in those situations, he's pretty dang clutch.

No.

 

Here is your arguement.

 

3rd and 4 scenario

 

You:  Oh snap, Kapernick just completed a 3rd down pass!  Money!

 

Me:  Um, you are punting b/c he didnt convert.  That completion was actually an epic fail b/c it went 2 yards.

 

You:  Whatever bro, stats sheet shows a completion. Clutch

[Heiisenberg]

again, those stats have nothing to do with a conversation about being good at 3rd down.  

 

Give me a second....Cam is freakish on 3rd down with his legs since arriving in the NFL.  Since he arrived in the NFL there are only a couple players (not just QBs, talking RBs) who have converted more on the ground.  

 

Have you ever looked into ESPN's QBR?  It quantifies situations kind of like this.  I.e. percentage of passes that result in touchdowns, or first downs.  They account clutch situations, conversions, turnovers, and weight them appropriately.  SO for example throwing the game winning touchdown, or throwing a td that gives you the lead at the end of the game is higher weighted than say throwing a td at garbage time in the 4th qtr against backups. Of course it includes so much more, but its the best rating I've seen that quantifies the sort of stats that simply arent considered with  broad stroke. 

 

For just one example one stat compares the points contributed by a qb vs the average qb in the league and what is his difference.  In that particular stat Kap is a 34, Cam is a 12.  It means Kap is responsible for more points per game over the average qb in terms of QBR.

 

Then there's a stat called Clutch Weighted Points: Kap is a 62 to Cam's 47. To put it in perspective Peyton is over 100. 

 

Clutch Index

The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.

 

Anyway as far as overall QBR is concerned Kap is #7 in the league with a 68.6  whereas Cam is #14 56.2.

 

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

[Heiisenberg]

No.

 

Here is your arguement.

 

3rd and 4 scenario

 

You:  Oh snap, Kapernick just completed a 3rd down pass!  Money!

 

Me:  Um, you are punting b/c he didnt convert.  That completion was actually an epic fail b/c it went 2 yards.

 

You:  Whatever bro, stats sheet shows a completion. Clutch

 

You simplify it sir. 

 

3rd and 4th scenario---Who is more likely to convert? The guy with higher completion % and more yards per pass? Or the guy with less yards per pass and a lower completion %? 

 

So with this random made up scenario, who is more likely to convert? Because its hypothetical you can only ask who is more likely.  Can you objectively agree with that?

[CRA]

Have you ever looked into ESPN's QBR?  It quantifies situations kind of like this.  I.e. percentage of passes that result in touchdowns, or first downs.  They account clutch situations, conversions, turnovers, and weight them appropriately.  SO for example throwing the game winning touchdown, or throwing a td that gives you the lead at the end of the game is higher weighted than say throwing a td at garbage time in the 4th qtr against backups. Of course it includes so much more, but its the best rating I've seen that quantifies the sort of stats that simply arent considered with  broad stroke. 

 

For just one example one stat compares the points contributed by a qb vs the average qb in the league and what is his difference.  In that particular stat Kap is a 34, Cam is a 12.  It means Kap is responsible for more points per game over the average qb in terms of QBR.

 

Then there's a stat called Clutch Weighted Points: Kap is a 62 to Cam's 47. To put it in perspective Peyton is over 100. 

 

Clutch Index

The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.

 

Anyway as far as overall QBR is concerned Kap is #7 in the league with a 68.6  whereas Cam is #14 56.2.

 

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

I prefer real numbers.  Like team A needs to gain 3 yards to convert a 3rd down.  Do they do it? That is real. 

 

It is an undeniable truth, that is factually supported....Carolina and Cam are BETTER at converting 3rd downs than SF

 

 

 

 

ESPN recognizes there made up stat.  That is it.  I once watched a game ESPN QBR said Jimmy Clausen was blowing Drew Brees out of  the water.  It is a joke.

[Jangler]

Have you ever looked into ESPN's QBR?  It quantifies situations kind of like this.  I.e. percentage of passes that result in touchdowns, or first downs.  They account clutch situations, conversions, turnovers, and weight them appropriately.  SO for example throwing the game winning touchdown, or throwing a td that gives you the lead at the end of the game is higher weighted than say throwing a td at garbage time in the 4th qtr against backups. Of course it includes so much more, but its the best rating I've seen that quantifies the sort of stats that simply arent considered with  broad stroke. 

 

For just one example one stat compares the points contributed by a qb vs the average qb in the league and what is his difference.  In that particular stat Kap is a 34, Cam is a 12.  It means Kap is responsible for more points per game over the average qb in terms of QBR.

 

Then there's a stat called Clutch Weighted Points: Kap is a 62 to Cam's 47. To put it in perspective Peyton is over 100. 

 

Clutch Index

The final major step is to look at how "clutch" the situation was when creating expected points. A normal play has a clutch index of 1.0. For instance, first-and-goal from the 10-yard line in a tie game at the start of the second quarter has a clutch index of almost exactly 1.0. A more clutch situation, one late in the game when the game is close -- the same situation as above but midway through the fourth quarter, for example -- has a clutch index of about 2.0. Maximum clutch indices are about 3.0, and minimum indices are about 0.3.

 

Anyway as far as overall QBR is concerned Kap is #7 in the league with a 68.6  whereas Cam is #14 56.2.

 

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

 

[Heiisenberg]

There.

 

Discussion over. ESPN commentators and analysts admit that the QBR system is flawed.

 

If it were so flawed how does it accurately predict the effectiveness of qbs so accurately? Guys like Peyton, Kap, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, Foles, Rivers, Cutler, Ryan---we all know theyre in the top 10 of nfl qbs, but how could a flawed QBR system accurately place them in the top 10 using their own QBR system?

 

Looking at who the top performers are in regard to QBR seems pretty dang accurate to me.