Chuck Cook-USA TODAY Sports
The recent addition of quarterbacks that can run and throw has transformed the game of fantasy football. The classic NFL quarterback is characterized by his pocket presence and pinpoint accuracy. The newest generation of quarterbacks has altered that way of thinking, making defenses compensate for an ever-present threat of the run.
We know what our eyes tell us about these two opposing styles but we are less familiar with the numbers and how they affect our fantasy teams. Unfortunately, even the NFL is a step behind in measuring the overall effectiveness of quarterbacks. Their principal statistic to gauge quarterback play is still Quarterback Rating which only takes a player’s passing numbers into account.
Of course the top running quarterback will not rate as high as the top pocket quarterback if you disregard their most dangerous asset. This has led me to tweak the conventional formula for Quarterback Rating to account for running statistics; I call it Adjusted Quarterback Rating.
The following numbers depict the classic quarterback rating of the top three fantasy pocket quarterbacks and the top three fantasy running quarterbacks. It is then contrasted with adjusted quarterback rating which combines the total efforts of a quarterback compared to their total touches rather than just passing attempts:
Drew Brees: 96.3 classic – 94.8 adjusted
Aaron Rodgers: 108.0 classic – 101.5 adjusted
Tom Brady: 98.7 classic – 99.2 adjusted
Cam Newton: 86.2 classic – 91.3 adjusted
Robert Griffin III: 102.4 classic – 105.5 adjusted
Russell Wilson: 100.0 classic – 101.5 adjusted
The numbers above indicate how running statistics alter the appearance of a quarterback’s overall value. Quarterback Rating is only of the best ways to measure NFL success but does it translate into fantasy football success?
To answer this, we call on another set of statistics that better indicate who the best fantasy quarterbacks are. The first stat is average weekly points. This is self-explanatory; it measures a quarterback’s average fantasy contribution:
Brees: 22.8
Rodgers: 21.8
Brady: 21.7
Newton: 20.9
Griffin III: 21.6
Wilson: 17.8
The second stat is standard deviation. Those familiar with statistics know that standard deviation measures variation or divergence away from the average. For fantasy football purposes, standard deviation allows us to measure consistency. A low standard deviation means that their score varies little from game to game, which translates into consistency. However, standard deviation does not indicate whether a player routinely overachieved or underachieved. That is why we combine it with average weekly points to measure the best and most consistent fantasy quarterbacks.
Brees: 6.7
Rodgers: 8.6
Brady: 6.1
Newton: 8.8
Griffin III: 8.8
Wilson: 9.2
All of this data allows us to make the distinction between real life and fantasy value. While the young, dynamic generation of running quarterbacks are appealing to the eye, they are slightly less productive and far more inconsistent from a fantasy perspective.
There are several possible explanations including the fact that the top pocket quarterbacks are established veterans while the top running quarterbacks have either one or zero years of NFL experience.
The moral of the story is that pocket passes produce consistent fantasy numbers. Running quarterbacks are capable of generating the highest point totals but they come at the expense of consistency.
If given the choice in 2013, I would go with the more dependable option. However, it is a only matter of time before these veterans pass the torch on to the the younger generation and they become the more dependable option.
