sbk92
2
- Messages
- 12,134
- Reaction score
- 6
In comparing the two QBs, scouts need to forget the eye test and trust the metrics
By KC Joyner
ESPN Insider
Christian Ponder hasn't generated as much buzz as Jake Locker, but he may be a better NFL QB.
One of the central lessons of the book "Moneyball" is that scouting eyes can be deceiving.
Billy Beane had every physical tool a scout could possibly want in a prospect but he didn't pan out as a successful major leaguer -- Beane's emotional makeup was such that he was not going to develop into a good hitter.
Author Michael Lewis wrote that the scouts might have been able to see this had they bothered to note that Beane's high school batting average dropped from over .500 in his junior year to just over .300 in his senior season. But scouts ignored it. In their collective mind's eye, all they saw was someone whose skills were so prodigious that he was destined to become a great major leaguer.
One might think that a "scouting eye" mindset might diminish in an era when metric studies are nearly ubiquitous, but the case of Jake Locker proves otherwise.
Locker's physical skills are phenomenal and are the main reason he is still considered a possible first-round draft prospect, even after a poor senior year. And over the long haul of his collegiate career those skills have not translated into consistently good on-field play.
There are a number of metrics to back up this assertion. Let's start with some of the basics.
Locker's 15-25 collegiate record included 26 games against teams that ended the season with a winning record. His record in those contests was 8-18.
An argument could be made that this mark says more about the relative talents of the Washington Huskies squad during this time than Locker, but in eight of those losses Locker failed to top 100 in passer rating (including three times in 2010).
To get an idea of just how bad this is, consider that the lowest-rated quarterback in FBS last year (Larry Smith of the Vanderbilt Commodores) had a 94.3 passer rating. Locker's performances in those games were truly bottom-of-the-barrel caliber.
But it isn't like he did much better when facing subpar foes, as his mark against teams with a .500 or lower season-ending win percentage was 7-7. This figure is especially telling, because it means that Locker wasn't able to carry his team to victories even against equal or lesser opponents. Many evaluators, however, consider winning percentages an unfair manner in which to grade a quarterback. So let's consider others.
Completion percentage is a quick and easy way to measure quarterback success. A 60 percent completion rate is generally considered a significant benchmark of success. However, Locker achieved that goal in only 12 contests, or 30 percent of the time.
Another way to measure a quarterback's prowess is to weigh his passer rating performance against the opponent's season-ending passer rating allowed total. This shows how often the quarterback did better or worse than might be expected. Locker had a higher mark in 18 out of the 40 contests. That means that in 55 percent of the games Locker played, the passing offense could be expected to play below the opponent's talent level.
That underperformance also shows up in his season and career passer rating totals.
To get an idea of just how bad Locker rates here, consider that his 118.95 career passer rating mark would have ranked 91st in that category in 2010 -- even his best season showing in this metric (129.74 in 2009) ranked 58th in FBS that year.
Some scouts may want to overlook these numeric weaknesses because of Locker's talents, but doing that leads to the question of why this approach hasn't been applied to former Florida State Seminoles starting quarterback Christian Ponder.
Ponder is rated much lower than Locker on almost every draft board and yet he beats Locker in nearly every important statistical category.
Record: Ponder had an 18-12 record against FBS opponents, which included a 13-12 mark against teams that ended the season with a winning record and a 5-0 showing against foes with losing records.
Career passer rating total: Ponder's 132.11 mark tops Locker's (118.95) by more than 10 points.
Completion rate of 60 percent or higher: Ponder reached this bar in 19 out of 34 contests (56 percent), but the more notable mark is that he also achieved this in 16 out of his last 21 games.
It isn't just on-field performance where Ponder keeps up. These two are almost identical in height, weight, arm length and hand size, and they posted extremely similar marks in the combine speed and jumping drills.
One combine area in which Locker did not fare as well as Ponder was in the Wonderlic intelligence test, as Ponder's score of 35 was far ahead of Locker's total of 20.
Both quarterbacks also competed in the Senior Bowl. Locker had a solid game (6-for-10 for 98 yards, 0-0 TD/INTs) but Ponder's numbers (7-for-13 for 132 yards, 2 TD-0 INTs) led to him being named Senior Bowl MVP.
If Ponder beats Locker in just about every conceivable way, why is he still rated lower? Some scouting reports say that it is because Locker is better at throwing deep passes, but again, the numbers don't bear that out.
ESPN Stats & Information tracked all of Locker's passes that traveled more than 20 yards in the air in 2010. He notched a 30.2 percent completion rate, an 11.3 yards per attempt (YPA) total and a 7-2 TD-to-INT ratio.
Now contrast those figures against Ponder's numbers in the same category when he faced the five best defenses in passer rating allowed on the Seminoles' 2010 schedule (Oklahoma Sooners, Brigham Young Cougars, Miami Hurricanes, Maryland Terrapins and Florida Gators): 35.7 completion rate, 10.1 YPA and a 3-1 TD-to-INT ratio. Those totals are basically equal to Locker's and yet they were against the toughest competition Ponder faced last year.
And that still won't be enough to put Ponder over Locker in many draft rooms. There may be a lot of explanations as to why this is, but the most likely reason is that many scouts are still using the mind's eye system. Their initial mental image of Locker was as a dominant prospect and, as is so often the case, first impressions are the strongest.
It should also be the first one to go when the metrics indicate otherwise.
KC Joyner, aka the Football Scientist, is a regular contributor to ESPN Insider.
By KC Joyner
ESPN Insider
Christian Ponder hasn't generated as much buzz as Jake Locker, but he may be a better NFL QB.
One of the central lessons of the book "Moneyball" is that scouting eyes can be deceiving.
Billy Beane had every physical tool a scout could possibly want in a prospect but he didn't pan out as a successful major leaguer -- Beane's emotional makeup was such that he was not going to develop into a good hitter.
Author Michael Lewis wrote that the scouts might have been able to see this had they bothered to note that Beane's high school batting average dropped from over .500 in his junior year to just over .300 in his senior season. But scouts ignored it. In their collective mind's eye, all they saw was someone whose skills were so prodigious that he was destined to become a great major leaguer.
One might think that a "scouting eye" mindset might diminish in an era when metric studies are nearly ubiquitous, but the case of Jake Locker proves otherwise.
Locker's physical skills are phenomenal and are the main reason he is still considered a possible first-round draft prospect, even after a poor senior year. And over the long haul of his collegiate career those skills have not translated into consistently good on-field play.
There are a number of metrics to back up this assertion. Let's start with some of the basics.
Locker's 15-25 collegiate record included 26 games against teams that ended the season with a winning record. His record in those contests was 8-18.
An argument could be made that this mark says more about the relative talents of the Washington Huskies squad during this time than Locker, but in eight of those losses Locker failed to top 100 in passer rating (including three times in 2010).
To get an idea of just how bad this is, consider that the lowest-rated quarterback in FBS last year (Larry Smith of the Vanderbilt Commodores) had a 94.3 passer rating. Locker's performances in those games were truly bottom-of-the-barrel caliber.
But it isn't like he did much better when facing subpar foes, as his mark against teams with a .500 or lower season-ending win percentage was 7-7. This figure is especially telling, because it means that Locker wasn't able to carry his team to victories even against equal or lesser opponents. Many evaluators, however, consider winning percentages an unfair manner in which to grade a quarterback. So let's consider others.
Completion percentage is a quick and easy way to measure quarterback success. A 60 percent completion rate is generally considered a significant benchmark of success. However, Locker achieved that goal in only 12 contests, or 30 percent of the time.
Another way to measure a quarterback's prowess is to weigh his passer rating performance against the opponent's season-ending passer rating allowed total. This shows how often the quarterback did better or worse than might be expected. Locker had a higher mark in 18 out of the 40 contests. That means that in 55 percent of the games Locker played, the passing offense could be expected to play below the opponent's talent level.
That underperformance also shows up in his season and career passer rating totals.
To get an idea of just how bad Locker rates here, consider that his 118.95 career passer rating mark would have ranked 91st in that category in 2010 -- even his best season showing in this metric (129.74 in 2009) ranked 58th in FBS that year.
Some scouts may want to overlook these numeric weaknesses because of Locker's talents, but doing that leads to the question of why this approach hasn't been applied to former Florida State Seminoles starting quarterback Christian Ponder.
Ponder is rated much lower than Locker on almost every draft board and yet he beats Locker in nearly every important statistical category.
Record: Ponder had an 18-12 record against FBS opponents, which included a 13-12 mark against teams that ended the season with a winning record and a 5-0 showing against foes with losing records.
Career passer rating total: Ponder's 132.11 mark tops Locker's (118.95) by more than 10 points.
Completion rate of 60 percent or higher: Ponder reached this bar in 19 out of 34 contests (56 percent), but the more notable mark is that he also achieved this in 16 out of his last 21 games.
It isn't just on-field performance where Ponder keeps up. These two are almost identical in height, weight, arm length and hand size, and they posted extremely similar marks in the combine speed and jumping drills.
One combine area in which Locker did not fare as well as Ponder was in the Wonderlic intelligence test, as Ponder's score of 35 was far ahead of Locker's total of 20.
Both quarterbacks also competed in the Senior Bowl. Locker had a solid game (6-for-10 for 98 yards, 0-0 TD/INTs) but Ponder's numbers (7-for-13 for 132 yards, 2 TD-0 INTs) led to him being named Senior Bowl MVP.
If Ponder beats Locker in just about every conceivable way, why is he still rated lower? Some scouting reports say that it is because Locker is better at throwing deep passes, but again, the numbers don't bear that out.
ESPN Stats & Information tracked all of Locker's passes that traveled more than 20 yards in the air in 2010. He notched a 30.2 percent completion rate, an 11.3 yards per attempt (YPA) total and a 7-2 TD-to-INT ratio.
Now contrast those figures against Ponder's numbers in the same category when he faced the five best defenses in passer rating allowed on the Seminoles' 2010 schedule (Oklahoma Sooners, Brigham Young Cougars, Miami Hurricanes, Maryland Terrapins and Florida Gators): 35.7 completion rate, 10.1 YPA and a 3-1 TD-to-INT ratio. Those totals are basically equal to Locker's and yet they were against the toughest competition Ponder faced last year.
And that still won't be enough to put Ponder over Locker in many draft rooms. There may be a lot of explanations as to why this is, but the most likely reason is that many scouts are still using the mind's eye system. Their initial mental image of Locker was as a dominant prospect and, as is so often the case, first impressions are the strongest.
It should also be the first one to go when the metrics indicate otherwise.
KC Joyner, aka the Football Scientist, is a regular contributor to ESPN Insider.