PDA

View Full Version : Peter King/SI.com Rank QBs 1-32


Atlanta Dan
06-18-2007, 05:54 PM
Peter King admits he is just trying to stir things up in the pre-training camp lull, so he has his list of how he predicts NFL QBs will perform this coming year from #1-#32.

No surprise that Peyton and Brady are #1 and #2.

The laughs start with King apologizing for ranking Drew Brees over the sainted Carson Palmer at #3:

I'd take Drew Brees over Carson Palmer if I were starting a team right now. Sacrilege!
No need to apologize Peter - Brees has actually won a playoff game.

We then proceed through Tony Romo, Jake Cutler, and Jon freaking Kitna before we get to Ben Roethlisberger at #17:

Ben Roethlisberger 17th? What gives? From Year 1 to Year 2 of his career, his completion percentage dropped 3.7 points; from year two to three it fell 3.0 points. His TD-to-interception ratio, plus-eight in 2005, dropped to minus-five last season. He is profoundly inconsistent. I say he's a C-plus player until I see six or eight straight weeks of the same guy.

I know these rankings are subjective, but the apology that Palmer is not ranked higher and rankings of Cutler and Romo above Ben make it look like King has a serious mancrush on certain non-playoff winning QBs.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/17/qbs/index.html

Black@Gold Forever32
06-18-2007, 06:04 PM
Vince Young as one of his upset top 10 QBs....Come on...He had a decent rookie year....Lets not put him in Canton just yet Peter.........lol He had games were he had 76 yards passing.....lol He made plays with his legs and thats why the Titans won some of those games...Lets wait and see what he does this year.....I remember when Mike Vick won that play-off game at Lambeau and alot of people thought Vick was going to do big things in the NFL.....So far it hasn't happened....So I want to see more from Young before buying into the hype....The league will catch up to him and his running ability...

As for Jon Kitna as another suprise top 10 QB and ranked ahead of Big Ben....thats just a joke and Peter should be smacked with hammer for writing that....lol

tony hipchest
06-18-2007, 06:04 PM
whats funny is the chart with p[layers stats he puts up to support his rankings. the chart and stats totally contradict his placement of ben. he says its about wins and yards per attempt yet discredits bens wins and near league leading ypa, by suggesting he will have the 17th best season this year.

either this is set up to get ben that coveted "comeback player of the year award" or we need to start thinking about drafting the next "brady quinn".

kind doesnt dissapoint me much but i have all the confidence he is way off the mark and will be eating some crow on this one.

revefsreleets
06-18-2007, 06:34 PM
Can anybody here think of 16 other QB's playing today they'd rather have starting for the Steelers on opening day?

fansince'76
06-18-2007, 07:19 PM
Can anybody here think of 16 other QB's playing today they'd rather have starting for the Steelers on opening day?

Active? No way.

The Duke
06-18-2007, 07:45 PM
I've seen bad articles but this is too much, Vince "overrated" Young is top ten? This guy just lost all his credibility.

alittlejazzbird
06-18-2007, 08:10 PM
You can tell Peter's going on vacation for the next month, leaving us all to hem and haw over his list. He's ranking all starting quarterbacks according to how he projects them to do in 2007, based on selected statistics from their 2005 and 2006 seasons.

Although I agree that Ben was inconsistent in 2006, I'd still rank him higher than 17 because he is a proven winner who was largely instrumental in the Steelers making it to the Super Bowl (his performances in the Indy and Denver games especially were exceptional), regardless of his poor passer rating in the actual SB. I don't know -- Romo? Young? Cutler? Kitna? McNabb? I'd take issue at the very least with all of them ranked ahead of Ben.

We can all agree that Ben had a bad 2006 (though he did finish 6-2), but apart from the horrendous number of interceptions, in my opinion his past performance indicates future success and I think he should have been ranked higher than 17.

MasterOfPuppets
06-18-2007, 08:22 PM
wow!.....cutler has a whole 2 wins under his belt,and he's a top 10 QB....:thumbsup:

SteelCityMan786
06-18-2007, 08:29 PM
McNabb Higher then Big Ben? BULLSHIT! Big Ben's got the Super Bowl ring and isn't in danger of losing his job. McNabb has missed 13 of the last 34 eagles games. Pathetic they rank McNabb higher. Not to mention mid season McNabb WILL BE REPLACED by Kolb.

GBMelBlount
06-18-2007, 10:21 PM
This year we will know if he is fully healed from his infirmities. However, I am always skeptical of anyone named "Peter King."

Newzfoxjr
06-19-2007, 12:04 AM
With some of that crap, I was expecting to see Rex Grossman and Eli Manning ahead of Ben.


This guy has a problem. John Kitna, Tony Romo, Vince Young and Cutler in the top 11? He says "I value wins from my quarterback", and they only have like 19 between all four of them?

Preacher
06-19-2007, 02:50 AM
This is what happens when people don't bother to actually watch the QB's that they are judging.

Think about it. Conventional Wisdom says that the Steelers run the football, all the time. Thus, any QB for Pittsburgh only has to manage a game. See, Bettis was gone, and the QB threw more, and got more interceptions. Thus, he isn't that good.

That is the normal fly-by-night idiotic arguments from national media who care more about watching two or three teams and players... most notably, the one that usually bring in the most money for the NFL... imagine that?

Now, if one actually thought to focus on a few of the Steeler games, what they would have found was that two years ago, Ben actually was taking over the games and winning them in the first half. THEN... Cowher would turn to the running game to finish the game off. However, that fly-by-night media would look up, see a couple running backs with the ball.. check the stats, and assume that Ben didn't do anything again.

Thats okay. I prefer it this way. Why draw attention to Ben? Let the teams prep for a run first, run always team.

stlrtruck
06-19-2007, 07:35 AM
I'm just curious why we are all in shock about Peter King's so-called "assessment" of QBs, specifically Ben. Most of us think PK is just an idiot who one day use to make sense but now he's just full of hot air and his own pride has gotten in the way of good sports journalism.

So since we know that he's an idiot with a good job, why do we really care what he "thinks" about Ben, let alone anything about the NFL?

Newzfoxjr
06-19-2007, 09:50 AM
Eh, I didn't know he was this much of an idiot, I always thought he was smarter...

Livinginthe past
06-19-2007, 12:58 PM
This is what happens when people don't bother to actually watch the QB's that they are judging.

Think about it. Conventional Wisdom says that the Steelers run the football, all the time. Thus, any QB for Pittsburgh only has to manage a game. See, Bettis was gone, and the QB threw more, and got more interceptions. Thus, he isn't that good.

That is the normal fly-by-night idiotic arguments from national media who care more about watching two or three teams and players... most notably, the one that usually bring in the most money for the NFL... imagine that?

Now, if one actually thought to focus on a few of the Steeler games, what they would have found was that two years ago, Ben actually was taking over the games and winning them in the first half. THEN... Cowher would turn to the running game to finish the game off. However, that fly-by-night media would look up, see a couple running backs with the ball.. check the stats, and assume that Ben didn't do anything again.

Thats okay. I prefer it this way. Why draw attention to Ben? Let the teams prep for a run first, run always team.

I doubt teams use Peter King articles as part of their scouting process.

CantStop85
06-19-2007, 04:04 PM
Can anybody here think of 16 other QB's playing today they'd rather have starting for the Steelers on opening day?

Depends on if we're talking about the 06 Ben Roethlisberger or the 04-05 Ben Roethlisberger. The 06 version? Yes. The 04-05 version? No.

His performance last year can be chalked up to his motorcycle accident, but he still has to go out and prove this year that he can be the player that he was before the accident.

verks36
06-19-2007, 04:17 PM
How in the world do u put cutler in front of Rothlisberger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Atlanta Dan
06-19-2007, 05:02 PM
How in the world do u put cutler in front of Rothlisberger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Since it is based on projected success for 2007 and since Cutler has such a thin record you can project just about anything for Cutler this year - FWIW I do think Denver is the team to beat inthe AFC West.

King knows he was just trying to stir things up - he keeps talking about Ben's inconsistency, but if that is the test there is no explanation for Romo & Rivers both falling off significantly in the latter part of 2006 while not being penalized for it by King. I take it as no more than a talking point to get us through the boredom until training camp.

Who knows - maybe Ben blew off King in an interview or would not agree with King as to how dreamy Carson Palmer is; King certainly gets snippy in responding today in the Tuesday edition of MMQB to the e-mails defending Ben.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/19/mailbag/index.html

tony hipchest
06-19-2007, 06:11 PM
Who knows - maybe Ben blew off King in an interview or would not agree with King as to how dreamy Carson Palmer is; King certainly gets snippy in responding today in the Tuesday edition of MMQB to the e-mails defending Ben.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/19/mailbag/index.htmlthanks. i forgot to check out the responses this morning. im inclined to believe the above statement. perhaps after kings excellent article on tomlin he was hoping to follow up with a "Big Ben- One Year After..." piece.

i wont bash king himself cause i really enjoy his work. but its definitely easy to punch holes in his premise like its tissue paper.

The fact is, for whatever reason, Roethlisberger has been inconsistent for much of the past two years. That's not something I invented. It is fact. As I wrote, his completion percentage has sagged 3.7 and 3 percent in the past two years, not risen. Maybe last year it was a result of the accident; what was 2005 all about? And though I still like Roethlisberger and his potential, my column was about the order in which I liked quarterbacks in 2007. And right now, until he proves he can put another good season on the board, Roethlisberger's a middle-of-the-pack quarterback to me.

king seems fixated on bens completion % dropping. wow, after 3 years it finally dropped into the tom brady range. he is really regressing huh? king doesnt mention that 60% is widely expected and acceptable for even great qb's. he doesnt mention that bens % is dropping from and ungodly 66% as a rookie, and a human temperature of a qb rating of 98.6 or so. nobody in the nfl has (or probably ever will) consistantly improved on a 66% qb rating. theres a reason 60% is a measuring stick in the nfl and batting .400 is such a milestone in baseball. simple sports rules: you dont "consistantly" throw for better than 66% in the nfl and you dont "consistantly" bat for .400. the guys on the other side of the ball get paid too. anyways david car threw for 70% last year, yet i didnt even see him on the list.

As for how I arrived at my picks, other than with a divining rod, I used a few measuring sticks. I value wins from my quarterback, and that helped Manning and Brady, the leaders in victories over the last two years.

on his list, only 8 qb's have more wins, and none but hasselbeck, have actually missed any games due to injury. hasselbeck has had one injury. ben has had an appendectomy and his knee bent backwards. the concussion, bike accident or thumb didnt cause him to miss time.

that helped Manning and Brady, the leaders in victories over the last two years. I value postseason success, and their seven combined wins over the past two years is significant.

ben has as many in the last 2 years as either of them. :hunch:

Completion percentage and yards-per-attempt are the two passing stats I value the most because they tell you how often a quarterback succeeds in efficiently moving the chains through the air. ben has been right at the top of both categories for his 1st 2 years. last years his YPA was still at the top. according to his "chart", ben only trails p. manning and t. romo (and his impressive 6 wins) in YPA.

Finally, intangibles. Brady led all passers with a 10 on a 10-point scale, because he's a coach, an offseason facilitator, a free-agent recruiter -- and he does it while retaining respect from the guys he often has to lean on hard.
this was the most bogus and insignificantly subjective part of the whole article. romo and ben both got an intangible rating of 5. hows this for intangibles? ben vs seattle in the playoffs: rushes for a td and 1st downs. Romo vs seattle in playoffs: fumbles and gets tripped up on a clear path to the endzone.

ultimately i think king is secretly is rooting for ben and just doesnt want to jinx him. ben disappointed alot of people (and their predictions) when he went and split his mellon on a windshield and the pavement.

king is fairly consistant in his article other than ranking players who supposedly will be entering their sophmore slump (credit big ben for totally killing that phrase and myth) and lowballing ben in a way that definitely makes one scratch their head.

these writers have gotta try to "save some face" from the greatness they heaped on ben his 1st 2 years... unfortunately you dont just "wear a helmet" in journalism, to do so.

CantStop85
06-19-2007, 07:54 PM
So...where would others put Big Ben?

Honestly, I might put him in the 10-15 range because of last year's drop off, but I still think he should be in the top half of starting quarterbacks. If he proves that he's back to 100% then I would drop him back somewhere into the top 10, maybe even top 5 if he's in 05 form.

Elvis
06-19-2007, 08:39 PM
So...where would others put Big Ben?

Honestly, I might put him in the 10-15 range because of last year's drop off, but I still think he should be in the top half of starting quarterbacks. If he proves that he's back to 100% then I would drop him back somewhere into the top 10, maybe even top 5 if he's in 05 form.
cantstop85, I am not real sure on how to take your avatar bud... just cant say that I like it at all...:jawdrop:
My opininon on this so-called ranking of QB's.. we will be able to rate them a little more conviently come January...:coffee:

Atlanta Dan
06-19-2007, 08:47 PM
cantstop85, I am not real sure on how to take your avatar bud... just cant say that I like it at all...:jawdrop:


FWIW it is hard for me to even say Can'tStop85's avatar is satire - he probably just copied the logo of some Sun Belt megachurch that attracts members by touting its great gym.

tony hipchest
06-19-2007, 09:07 PM
cantstop85, I am not real sure on how to take your avatar bud... just cant say that I like it at all...:jawdrop:
My opininon on this so-called ranking of QB's.. we will be able to rate them a little more conviently come January...:coffee:
as a Christian, i get it, understand it, like it, and find it funny. did Jesus not turn over the money changers tables as the temple as he called it a "den of thieves"?



FWIW it is hard for me to even say Can'tStop85's avatar is satire - he probably just copied the logo of some Sun Belt megachurch that attracts members by touting its great gym.:sofunny: so funny cause its so true.

but before this entertaining thread is completely derailed... i completely believe ben can easilly be 7-9 in stats and wins alike (= 4th seed or better in the playoffs).


sure he may not beat kitna in overall yards thrown, but in a head to head matchup, my moneys on ben to win every day.

CantStop85
06-19-2007, 10:47 PM
but before this entertaining thread is completely derailed... i completely believe ben can easilly be 7-9 in stats and wins alike (= 4th seed or better in the playoffs).


sure he may not beat kitna in overall yards thrown, but in a head to head matchup, my moneys on ben to win every day.

Yeah, I think Peter King was thinking of his fantasy football team when he put Kitna so high.

cantstop85, I am not real sure on how to take your avatar bud... just cant say that I like it at all...

Is it a shot at big business and marketing? Yes.
Is it a shot at religion today? Somewhat.

SteelCityMan786
06-19-2007, 10:53 PM
Yeah, I think Peter King was thinking of his fantasy football team when he put Kitna so high.



Is it a shot at big business and marketing? Yes.
Is it a shot at religion today? Somewhat.

You might get called out man. Just a heads up.

Livinginthe past
06-19-2007, 11:22 PM
I think the CantStop85's avatar is demeaning to the church and religion in general...........























............don't you know we got Playstation 3 now?? :wink02:

CantStop85
06-20-2007, 12:19 AM
I think the CantStop85's avatar is demeaning to the church and religion in general...........























............don't you know we got Playstation 3 now?? :wink02:

I guess that's why it's free, man lol

Preacher
06-20-2007, 12:39 AM
I doubt teams use Peter King articles as part of their scouting process.

Hey... LITP...

what I was saying was... Conventional wisdom says the Steelers always run... Peter King bought into it as well as everyone else, without thinking twice. So, let CW continue... and teams GP according to CW.

thats all...

Preacher
06-20-2007, 12:45 AM
Is it a shot at big business and marketing? Yes.
Is it a shot at religion today? Somewhat.


CS85... I gotta admit... I saw it first as a shot at a faith... more then a shot at business and marketing.

And I think I am usually pretty balanced about that kind of thing... I don't know...

Maybe just a little over the edge.

However, your choice...

stlrtruck
06-20-2007, 07:43 AM
CJ85 I'd put Ben in the top 10 at least. Definitely ahead of Kitna and some of the other starting backups in the league. He's probably somewhere between 5-8 but that's just me. I think if you use his overall career stats, he's definitely better than most of the QBs in the league. However, Peter King only wants to use certain stats to pad his article - so it's useless in that aspect.

As for your Avatar (since we're all commenting on it), I think it's funny. I don't see it so much as sacralige (sp) but more as a poke at the big churches who promise happy joyful messages and we're all going to heaven type mentality. I thought it was funny too (but still waiting for my free PS2).

onthebus36
06-20-2007, 05:26 PM
My big gripe with this is that is pretends to be statistical analysis and it's not. If you look at the matrix that goes with the article, Ben's stats are better than five or six of the QBs ahead of him.

Then, notice how many of the QBs ahead of his are being rated on one year, or even partial season stats. Jay Cutler, for example, is rated ahead of Ben based on one partial season's passing while the matrix is supposed to be based on the last two seasons so it includes the Super Bowl XL season.

Then, to throw in a fudge factor, he assigns an "intanglible" rating. What is that?

Looking purely at stats, Ben is a either just out of the top ten or at the bottom of the top ten. I think that's about right statistically.

My next big complaint is that criticisms aren't applied uniformly. Let's look at King's knocks on Ben:

1- Declining accuracy percentage/Inconsistency
2- Interceptions

1- Ben's accuracy decreased by 3% from 2005. Carson Palmer's decreased by over five percent by the same criticism isn't levelled at him. And didn't the Bengals finish with the same record as the Steelers?

2- Ben is judged on a interception to TD ratio, not a turnover to TD ratio. There are other QBs on the list who had a bad case of fumblitis last year. Factor in fumbles, and some of them drop disproportionately.

Last, Ben's injury isn't factored in but other QBs injuries are.

Mark Twain said there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Statistics misrepresented can show you anything you want to see. If Peter King were saying these are my guy picks, I wouldn't have so big an issue. Because he presents this as a researched statistical analysis, he really gets my goat.

Big Ben is a top ten NFL QB. Period. And I have the statistics to prove it! :wink02:

rbryan
06-21-2007, 04:32 PM
I'd be more worried if this nutbag picked Ben in the top 3 or 4. Hopefully he will feel he has something to prove after reading this.

Scratch that, what I'm really hoping for is that Ben isn't sitting around with a copy of SI worrying about what this or any other windbag writer thinks.

If you went by stats alone in 06 he is somewhere below 17.

onthebus36
06-22-2007, 03:50 PM
Another stat Mr. King ignored is win percentage. From 2003-2006, here are the top four QBs by win percentage (a fairly important stat!)

1. Tom Brady
2. Peyton Manning
3. Ben Roethlisberger
4. Jake Plummer

All four are 72% or higher!