Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quarterbacks and the Wonderlic

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Its very interesting but I dont think it matters to much. Much of those players in the 50-60 range were picked in the 1st round then guys like Tom Brady that scores a 100 gets picked in the 6th? Doubt it matters much...

    Comment


    • #17
      I think it depends on what kind of qb you are, pocket passer you should have high score, like Brady and Bulger did.

      If you can move around (not in the pocket) scramble, then if the score lower its not going to matter as much. McNabb 14, Culpepper 17.

      But its not always right Alex Smith's score was 40

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by bhaarat316 View Post
        I think it depends on what kind of qb you are, pocket passer you should have high score, like Brady and Bulger did.

        If you can move around (not in the pocket) scramble, then if the score lower its not going to matter as much. McNabb 14, Culpepper 17.

        But its not always right Alex Smith's score was 40
        But it is arguable that Alex Smith should have never been the prospect he was. Ryan Fitzpatrick had a 50 but that doesn't make him a good prospect. It is just something can be roughly used when comparing QBs of equal talent. Especially when making the jump into the NFL you often have to rely more on decision making ability rather than just getting by on pure talent like you often can in college.
        Last edited by Jughead10; 03-03-2008, 09:28 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          http://www.macmirabile.com/Wonderlic.htm

          Has all the Wonderlics for QBs for awhile. May be helpful


          And yeah, give us a scale and what it means. What is a 100? What is a 50?
          Last edited by Shane P. Hallam; 03-03-2008, 09:00 AM.


          Follow Me on Twitter!
          https://twitter.com/ShanePHallam

          Comment


          • #20
            Didn't Vince Young get like a negative score?
            Originally posted by Paul
            Eli's opportunity to become a legend.
            Originally posted by Vikes99ej
            These last 50 seconds will define Eli Manning.
            MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Number 10 View Post
              Didn't Vince Young get like a negative score?
              He did horrible the first time he took it. But then took it again I believe and did better. Nothing special but at least better than it was.

              Comment


              • #22
                Peyton Manning - 28
                Ryan Leaf - 27

                The correlation is obvious...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Jughead10 View Post
                  But it is arguable that Alex Smith should have never been the prospect he was. Ryan Fitzpatrick had a 50 but that doesn't make him a good prospect. It is just something can be roughly used when comparing QBs of equal talent. Especially when making the jump into the NFL you often have to rely more on decision making ability rather than just getting by on pure talent like you often can in college.
                  Fitzpatrick got a 38


                  Sig by me... Hold the applause.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Paranoidmoonduck View Post
                    Average season production wouldn't be a bad standard, but I don't really think that vague estimation is so bad for something like this. That said, I think you'll find that the wonderlic and success have little correlation.
                    vague estimations like this have no place in real statistic analysis.


                    Sig by me... Hold the applause.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I think this all depends on what kind of system the QB is in. Is it a system predicated on the WR progression or based on coverage progression? Some systems have it where you find which WR/TE or skill player that is the most open and you throw it do them, while others are based on reading coverages and defenders. So you're basically reading defenders and then making your decisions based on that. Factor in concept of plays as well, and I am guessing these numbers would reflect to some coaches and GMs the ability to digest all the information of being a QB, and maybe indicates something to do with the system they're in. I am not saying that's 100% right, but maybe these numbers have more meaning than we think.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        It will be just as difficult to come up with a statistical scale of how to rate quarterbacks (who's to say what's most important--ratings? TD passes? TD-INT ratio? Super Bowl Wins?). Coming up with a formula like that is just as subjective as grading players. What I hoped to do by posting this here was to get a significant number of knowledgeable responses that I could then compile into one grade for each player.

                        As for defining a scale, I would suggest the following:

                        A (90-100): Solid, long term franchise quarterback, with All Pro potential. Think Joe Montana, Brett Favre, etc.
                        B (80-89): Solid, reliable starter, may be a Pro-Bowler once or twice a year, but not a perennial all star by any means, but can at least lead a team. I'm thinking of a Brad Johnson/Trent Dilfer type here.
                        C (70-79): Marginal Starter/Above Average Backup. Think Josh McCown or possibly Jason Garrett here (more at the low end).
                        D (60-69): Questionable Bust--some success in league, but minimal success. More along the lines of a Quincy Carter than a Ryan Leaf.
                        F (50-59): Absolute Bust. Ryan Leaf. Akili Smith. Cade McNown.

                        Now an argument could be made that those guys who were high draft picks and earned very low grades (Leaf, Smith, etc.) had at least the potential to be graded in the 70s level, but never had to reach that level because they earned their one big contract and then gave up.

                        As for those of you who were wondering about the Wonderlic, yes I do already have scores, and according to my VERY preliminary analysis there is actually a NEGATIVE correlation between Wonderlic scores and QB performance. That may be subject to change with some changed grades and additional subjects, but for right now, it seems that the Wonderlic has absolutely no influence on a QBs performance, unless some other outside hypothesis (like that pocket QBs need higher scores) proves accurate.

                        I'm also planning on doing a similar analysis for running backs and 40 yard dash times...which may be more accurate and useful because I will be able to grade more running backs than those who are just starters.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Could just use Passer Rating?
                          "We're only going to score 17 points?" Brady said before chuckling about it. "OK. Is Plax playing defense? I wish he had said 45-42 and gave us a little credit for scoring more points."

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by ks_perfection View Post
                            Could just use Passer Rating?
                            Passer rating alone may end up being the best solution, although it does not take into account certain factors, in my mind, that reflect on the overall success of a quarterback's career.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by VoteLynnSwan View Post
                              Fitzpatrick got a 38
                              He got a 48, and the got pissed off because he graduated from Harvard and thought he should have done better. So he took it again and got a 50.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                What has Tony Romo done to merit being 7 points higher than Phillip Rivers?

                                Your entire system is flawed. The idea that you made personal accessments of a players career based on your opinion makes your study worthless.

                                Furthermore, there are way to many factors that are not held constant here. How would these QBs have done in different systems, with different players and different coaching and with different development plans.

                                Why don't you just go ahead and cure cancer while you are at it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information