Ricky Stanzi, the Best QB in the 2011 NFL Draft and/or the next Tom Brady
 

**** it I'm giving this info its own thread. Its way too interesting to be buried in some other thread.

http://fantasyfootballmetrics.com/Pl..._2-23-2011.htm

NFL DRAFT 2011 - QB
By R.C. Fischer

NFL Draft 2011: Statistical Analysis of Ricky Stanzi, the Best QB in the 2011 NFL Draft and/or the next Tom Brady?

*An on-going series of putting college QBs in our mathematical analysis. We don’t have all the needed data until the 2011 NFL Combine results, but we can assume some of it (for now) and we have all the game performance/statistics.

See this link for details on the College QB rating system -- Predicting the Unpredictable…Projecting a College QB to the NFL with a Mathematical Formula

Ricky Stanzi, Iowa - NFL Draft 2011

I know you are going to find this completely insane...

New readers, I may have already lost you with the title...but bear with me on this. At worst, this will just be an interesting read and something you will say "no way" to. At best, this will be a tremendous call and huge validation for our mathematical model's ability to project college QBs to the NFL. (I also have a few years to hide from it potentially too!)

I have to confess I did not watch many Iowa Hawkeye football games this season. As the college QBs start their journey to the NFL, I get more interested for the Fantasy Football aspect. This season, I was aware of the usual "big names" -- Newton, Locker, Gabbert, Mallett and had been intrigued by Andy Dalton...but I have to say when I saw Ricky Stanzi's name on a list -- I wondered, "how did he make it in the QBs list for the 2011 NFL Draft"? Don't ask me why I had that reaction, I just know I did. Big-10 bias (against), maybe? Flashbacks to Chuck Long, perhaps? Whatever the reason, I just had an irrational gut reaction. Which is why I love what I do, I try to eliminate the emotional and just rely on the data. Not knowing Stanzi, I was curious as how the analysis would turn out.

As I input the key game/tougher opponent game data for Ricky Stanzi into our algorithm for analyzing college QBs, I just kept saying "that's pretty good" after each game entered...and it just kept rolling. Before I went to take a look at Stanzi's overall total score in our system I thought, "this could be pretty good". When I did finally look at the overall rating, it wasn't good -- it was great. It was college-to-NFL projected "elite". High up on the list wedged in-between Carson Palmer and Mark Sanchez, and slightly above Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers. I had to go back check a 2nd and 3rd time to see if I had made an error. No error...

Can Ricky Stanzi really be a future elite NFL QB? Can he really be the # 1 overall best QB (according to our system right now)? Right now he is for us. A lot of this potential stardom projection is riding on his Wonderlic scores from the NFL Combine, a bad score can tumble Stanzi right out of great and into maybe good or mediocre. Assuming an average/good Wonderlic score, Ricky Stanzi is the hidden gem QB of 2011.

What about Stanzi makes him pop in our system?

NO Red-flags in our system!

We found multiple things that future NFL elite QB's had in common in college. Subsequently, we found things future NFL bust/weak QB's had in common as well -- we called them, simply, "red-flag metrics". Some red-flags for the QBs are historical killers (90%+ probable), such as -- QB's with low Wonderlic scores, "short" (in height) QB's, high or low ratios on key advanced metrics we have on various passing stats. Just one red-flag is one foot in the grave for their future NFL elite prospects, 2 red-flags is almost an assured question mark on even being good in the NFL, 3+ red-flags is almost guaranteed a bust in our system (3+ red-flag QB examples in our system = Ryan Leaf, Tim Tebow, Chad Henne, Max Hall, Rex Grossman, Derek Anderson and Tavaris Jackson...among others. Jay Cutler is the probably the best NFL QB with 3+ red-flags in our system).

No red-flags is just not avoiding trouble, it is several key metrics that when we look back at history -- the QBs with particular red-flags in our system were not as good as hyped and/or "busted" from lofty expectations. Perhaps a list of current QBs in our mathematical system that have NO red-flags, will impress you on the fact that Ricky Stanzi could be special.

The 14 QBs with no red-flags of 60+ studied in the last decade (and a few outside of the last decade) *in alphabetical order:

Bradford, Sam
Brady, Tom
Elway, John (sketchy, we have yet to be able fully break him down due to some missing data...but of what we have, he has none)
Flacco, Joe
Kolb, Kevin
Leftwich, Byron
Luck, Andrew
Manning, Peyton
Palmer, Carson
Pike, Tony (may not belong here, we have a sketchy Wonderlic data point we have assumed neutral until we know...but if bad, he would fall off list)
Pennington, Chad
Rodgers, Aaron
Roethlisberger, Ben
Sanchez, Mark
14 QBs with no red-flags. Take away Andrew Luck because he is not even draft eligible. Take away John Elway and Tony Pike, because of some possible data question marks on our end and we have 11 QB's who have played in the NFL -- with 9 of the 11 (82%) as good, great and good/potentially great on this list. The 2 misses in our system so far are (1) Byron Leftwich is not elite, maybe not even good. (2) Kevin Kolb is incomplete (however, I think he will ultimately be star of this magnitude...those of you that have been with the site awhile know my Kolb love affair). If Kolb hits, then our NO red-flag indicator for future success would be up to a 91% accuracy of predicting NFL good/greatness.

It's a laundry list of mostly impressive QBs. Now add to that list Ricky Stanzi, the only 2011 QB prospect with no red-flags in our system currently. (Andrew Luck would have been too). I'm as shocked as you are...Ricky Stanzi, really?



Great against better competition

Stanzi had 3 major tests in conference in 2010, a Big-10 Conference in which Stanzi has started for 3 seasons...and these teams have a book on him. Facing Wisconsin (11-2), Michigan State (11-2) and Ohio State (12-1), Stanzi put up the following stats:

7 Passing TDs and NO Interceptions

The elite QBs of the NFL threw for between 15-19 Pass Attempts per Passing TD in "key" games, and some QBs hit as low (good) as 10-12 Pass Attempts per Passing TD. Stanzi averaged a very low (good) 11.9 Passing TDs per Pass Attempts in these 3 big matchups

Besides a stellar/perfect NO interceptions in these big 3 games, Stanzi hit on a 67.4% Completion Percentage as well

Iowa/Stanzi played the Arizona Wildcats this season, coached by defensive guru Mike Stoops. Stoops/Arizona only allowed two QBs to throw for 3+ TDs in a game against them this season -- not Andrew Luck (he had 2), but it was Oregon's Darron Thomas and yes...Ricky Stanzi.



Better than Gabbert in the 2010 Bowl Game vs. Missouri?

This may be crazy talk too, but hang with me...

Stanzi statistically bombed in one game in 2010 -- the Insight Bowl Game matchup against Missouri. Stanzi had no TDs and 2 INTs. Stanzi's only 2 INT game of the season. In that game Blaine Gabbert had 434 yards passing and won the hearts of everyone who just watched the game from a stat tally perspective. But was Gabbert really the better QB that day?

434 yards for Gabbert is awesome, but it was on 57 Pass Attempts. Stanzi only had 21 pass attempts in this game, in part because Iowa RB Marcus Coker had 33 carries for 219 yards. Why pass if you can run all over Mizzu, and win (which Iowa did)? Looking at the passing productivity by breaking it down to the view from the per passing attempts...a quick look at Gabbert vs. Stanzi in the Bowl Game from a different perspective:

Yards per Pass Attempt = 7.6 for Gabbert, 9.5 for Stanzi

Yards per Completion = 10.6 for Gabbert, 18.2 for Stanzi

If both QBs equally had 35 pass attempts at their above pace, Gabbert would have thrown for 266 yards to Stanzi's 332.

Not to say Stanzi had a great game...because it was his worst game of 2010. It's to point out that looking only at the totals -- Stanzi vs. Gabbert total stats in this game would have made Stanzi forgettable and Gabbert brilliant, but it really had to do more with Pass Attempt totals. Stanzi wasn't as bad as it seemed, and Gabbert wasn't near as impressive as his 434 yards would show. Gabbert also threw 2 INTs as well in this game (like Stanzi), and 1 TD.



Ricky Stanzi as the next Tom Brady?

Blasphemy I know...

Please keep in mind, I have no loyalty to the University of Iowa. I had seen Ricky Stanzi play a little before I started this research. Of what I remember, I didn't really remember anything great (or bad). Stanzi never registered anything in my mind. This statement comparing him to Brady is just as crazy to me as it is to you. However, I am now suddenly very intrigued (and hand-cuffed) to Ricky Stanzi with this statement.

When I went into to see why Stanzi was so good in our ratings, it wasn't just one good thing (it never is to achieve the scores the future elites ultimately did). It's just that Stanzi is well above average in every metric we judge, with no red-flags or outliers. His numbers parallel nicely against the best of today's NFL QBs data in college. When I started filtering Stanzi's metrics in our system and considered similar QBs around his height and weight...out popped Tom Brady. What is eerie and cheesy about that is, when I started researching Stanzi more because of the high score that popped up in our system analysis -- I went and watched some game tape and when I looked at him I exclaimed, "he looks just like Tom Brady". Tall, thin, accurate, steady. When I then filtered our college QB database of metrics and Brady was sitting there as a best match, I was amazed and felt weird at the same time. It's cliché' to say "the next Tom Brady", but the numbers are saying -- Ricky Stanzi might be the next Tom Brady.

A few key metrics on Brady & Stanzi below:

"Adj" means just key games/better competition -- weighted for strength of opponent

"per 35 att" numbers are the key games, weighted for strength of opponent and then translated into an average as if every QB had an equal 35 Pass Attempts per game all the time, and thus what would each QB produce if they had 35 passes per game based on the key games their final college season.

QB Yr College H W adj Comp Pct Adj Yds per Comp adj Pass Att per TD adj Pass Att Per INT Yds per game 35 Att TDs per game 35 Att INTs per game 35 Att
Brady, Tom 1999 Michigan 76.3 211 64.6% 11.8 15.0 37.9 266.3 2.3 0.9
Stanzi, Ricky 2010 Iowa 76.1 221 63.6% 12.5 15.5 57.7 277.6 2.3 0.6
A respected scouting report on Brady in 2000 pre-draft (found on a Google search) = "Poor build, very skinny and narrow, lacks mobility and the ability to avoid the rush, lacks a strong arm."

A scouting report I just read on Stanzi = "Average arm, nothing spectacular about his throws...Not a great runner...Limited ceiling because of his average physical talents..."



Ricky Stanzi Overall Score = 1.012

*see historical rating chart on link to original study = Predicting the Unpredictable…Projecting a College QB to the NFL with a Mathematical Formula

As I re-examine the numbers, another thing that is rare on Stanzi is -- that as we refine the numbers to looking at just the better opponents, then adding in a weighted system to the most difficult opponents -- that is where Stanzi's passing metrics actually increase. Where most all other QBs in our mathematical system tail off a little (understandably with facing the toughest competition) as we "weight" the stats for opponents difficulty...Stanzi actually improves his performance against the better competition.

All this is great for Ricky Stanzi now, but we're still assuming some data. If Stanzi bombs or underperforms the Wonderlic...no more Tom Brady comparisons, and down he will fall from possible elite to possible just mediocre/good. If Stanzi scores well on the Wonderlic don't be shocked if Stanzi starts moving from a current potential 4-5th Round pick to a 2nd-3rd Round pick...and then don't be shocked if he actually becomes a first round actual selection...you heard it here first (again, unless he bombs the Wonderlic). If Stanzi doesn't work his way into the 1st Round -- I'll bet a "smart" team snags Stanzi (like a NE, PIT, PHI, SD, etc) in the 2nd-3rd Round.
's Reputation

I think this is the best sign for Stanzi or any QB the Chiefs have ever had.

ROFL

Obviously the premise seems far-fetched, but the numbers are pretty damn impressive. If Pioli pulled something like that twice, he would be exec of the century.

he's prolly better than any bak-up we have .. hopefully he can learn the playbook and play a decent pre-season .. if we have one ...

Huh. Well, I guess we'll see. At this rate, I'm just hoping for an improvement over Brokie.

you could even throw handsize into that algorithm and he'd pass with 10'

There is no ****ing way anyone could have watched that game and thought Stanzi outplayed Gabbert. That is beyond insanity.

Not saying I agree with the whole premise but its impressive none the less. And really whether Gabbert or he were better is pretty meaningless to the article anyway.

This is a repost from a few months ago. The original thread is buried deep in Draft Planet.

But I don't blame you. It is/was an intriguing article

Welp, the numbers have spoken... if he doesnt become a swashbuckling throwback stud i'll move to a cave in remotest Utah.

Speaking of swashbuckling, did I ever tell you fellas about the time I had a gay crush on Errol Flynn?

I know but after reading it I got pretty excited for Mr. Stanzi. After we drafted him I reread it and figured I had to share the news with my brethren.

:popcorn:

Lol stanzi is fodder

He was a game manager.
Posted via Mobile Device

Are you pregnant with Gabbert's kids?

Some of the time, yes. He was.

But he has shown multiple times that he can also drive your team down the field in crunch time and get the ball into the endzone.

I bet he has at least 8 or 9 wins where he threw the winning touchdown pass in the final minutes.

I think that with Zorn working with he and Cassel...Stanzi has a chance to develop into a pretty good player that a team can win with.

I aint complaining. Just not putting our hopes up.
Posted via Mobile Device

The next Todd Collins maybe.

If we got the next Todd Collins with a 5th round pick we did a great job.

I wouldn't go that far. We should be able to pick up a Todd Collins any time we want w/o wasting a draft pick.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7p9xT-7-UkU?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7p9xT-7-UkU?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

Collins was better than that. But if thats the floor then I'm pretty excited.

LMAO, please do tell...

Stanzi is the best value pick and the one I am most excited about.

The similarities to Brady are eerie.

Gotta be impressed with the play against stronger competition.

That was a fun and exciting read. And after reading that I hope Cassel has season ending vagina surgery tomorrow. Let's get him playing and be SB contenders in 3 years.

I remember this as well. And, for the record, Stanzi passed on the Wonderlic Score that was in question in the article.

I guess the ending of the article would now mean we must be included in the "Smart Teams" category from now on? :hmmm:

The article stated also that Tim Tebow was rated the same as Ryan Leaf ROFL

I guess we better buy him some throwing gloves.

Ben Roethlisberger just rapes chicks in bathrooms now :thumb:

Drafting a QB is like pulling a slot machine handle. We all know that nothing will probably come out of it, but maybe, just MAYBE we will finally hit that jackpot.


That is what makes drafting a QB exciting.

He scored a 30 on the wonderlic

What's the score range ? I assume that's good.

I googled. Nevermind. Stanzi is smart.

The Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test (formerly known as the Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT)) is a twelve-minute, fifty-question test used to assess the aptitude of prospective employees for learning and problem-solving in a range of occupations. The test was developed by industrial psychologist Eldon F. Wonderlic.[1] The score is calculated as the number of correct answers given in the allotted time. A score of 20 is intended to indicate average intelligence (corresponding to an intelligence quotient of 100; a rough conversion is accomplished via the following formula: IQ = 2WPT + 60.[citation needed] A new version was released in January 2007 called the Wonderlic Contemporary Cognitive Ability Test (formerly known as the Wonderlic Personnel Test – Revised). It contains questions more appropriate to the 21st century and is available both online and in printed form, whereas the original test is only available on paper.

Predictor of success in the NFLJohn P. Lopez of Sports Illustrated proposes a 26-27-60 rule to predict a quarterback's success in the NFL: At least a 26 on the Wonderlic, at least 27 college starts, and at least 60% pass completion, and lists several examples of successes and failures based on the rule.[15]

On the other hand, some well-known players have scored low on the test. Dan Marino and Vince Young both scored 16 on the test, though Young scored a 6 on his first attempt.[7] A 2005 study by McDonald Mirabile found that there is no significant correlation between Wonderlic scores and a quarterback's passer rating, and no significant correlation between Wonderlic scores and a quarterback's salary.[16] Similarly, a 2009 study by Brian D. Lyons, Brian J. Hoffman, and John W. Michel found that Wonderlic test scores failed to positively and significantly predict future NFL performance for any position.[17]

The Lyons study also found that the relationship between Wonderlic test scores and future NFL performance was negative for a few positions, indicating the higher a player scores on the Wonderlic test, the worse the player will perform in the NFL.[17][18] Mike Florio of Profootballtalk.com observes that

scoring too high can be as much of a problem as scoring too low. Football coaches want to command the locker room. Being smarter than the individual players makes that easier. Having a guy in the locker room who may be smarter than every member of the coaching staff can be viewed as a problem — or at a minimum as a threat to the egos of the men who hope to be able when necessary to outsmart the players, especially when trying in some way to manipulate them.[19] :LOL:
McInally, whom the Cincinnati Bengals selected in the fifth round of the 1975 NFL Draft, believes that his perfect score caused him to be selected later than he would have otherwise

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/...ic-339371.html


:LOL: ROFL :LOL:

Stanzi is the player that has me really excited.


QB is the one component that can either take this team to the promise land or leave it in mediocrity. All of the other picks are just pieces.

Herm Edwards problem wrapped in a nutshell.

Cool, a 30 on a wonderlic means he's decently smart. Not a genius PHD physicist, but a lot smarter than an average person off the street, maybe a 115-120 IQ.

According to the math nerds, scoring really high doesn't necessarily mean you'll succeed, its a "weed-out" measurement where if you score low (Tebow) then you are far more likely to bust. A 30 doesn't mean great things in the future, it just means "Great, you passed, you are smart enough to be an NFL QB, now lets move on to the next test".

In that case, Herm must've felt like Custer at Little Bighorn.

One theory on that, is way back then they didn't take it seriously and blew it off. They got drafted anyway.

Now, if you screw up the wonderlic you lose millions. Most major QB prospects work with mental coaches who try to teach them how to score high on the test, and they take practice tests. So a lot of these guys are now trying as hard as they can to score higher than a 25-26. If you are really trying and still score below a 25 today, then that may be indicative of not being smart enough to handle the position.

what?ROFL

:)

the average for 30 quarterbacks slated to start in 2010 is even higher, at 28.5. And the average score among the past seven Super Bowl winners is a 30.1. The scores for Kansas City's Matt Cassel could not be found.

Its hard being the dumbest guy in the room.

Oh Dear Lord. :D

I sure he got flustrated many times.


Maybe he was so dumb that he was completely oblivious to it.

I personally don't believe he was the best QB in the draft, but can be very good given some time.

That's not the floor, that's the ceiling.

Why do you hate the Chiefs?

Because it's Sunday.

I disagree. I think 7 time SB MVP is a reasonable expectation. And a double enshrinement as a QB and Running Back in Canton when he unexpectedly gets Charles' carries.

That's a reasonable expectation based on the article :)

Really going out on a limb are we?

Haha, sorry. New poster and I'm trying to learn the ropes.

That's exactly what's going to happen....with Powe. They're converting him to QB as we speak. It's lightning striking twice.

Kiper just said that Ricky Stanzi is the quarterback that got drafted into the best spot.

Said that he thinks Stanzi is the starter in 2-3 years.

The best things about Stanzi:

1. He's not Matt Cassel
2. If he ends up successful, Wile E. Pioli (genius) will be able to take credit. Cassel isn't Pioli's only boy any more.

3. He's not Brodie Croyle

You didn't finish

ROFL

That's what I was thinking.

We see it here all the time.

Why did you look at me when you said that? :D

How many times this past season did Blaine Gabbert line up under center? In the NFL, that kind of counts.

Its an exciting article for sure

So what becomes of this guy? Do the Chiefs draft another QB to replace him? Or do they roll with A. Smith, Daniels, Stanzi ?

If they pass on a Geno at one which is likely, may as well keep him around.

Apparently he's more hot garbage to go with the other hot garbage we have at QB

Kiper knows all.

I don't think Stanzi will make the final cut.

We draft Bray.

Stanzi get cut.

The amount of stupid in this thread is staggering...

"Swashbuckling"... thats just a damn cool word, aint it?

Doesnt make a damn lick of sense, but it sure sounds cool.

And how does that make this thread any different from most others?

:D

It will be fun to bump the Geno threads in a few years.

The views are so extreme on either side of the issue, somebody is bound to get embarrassed.

I'm a Chiefs fan. You cant embarrass me anymore than this franchise does day in and out.

We quest for 9-7, retread QB's and Fail... Whether or not Geno pans out or not, We will still be embarrassed with our failings on Sunday afternoons for being a chickenshit franchise....

The LOLZ are strong in this thread.

I bet ol R.C. looks back and says "Why the **** did I waste all that time writing that garbage for a guy that hasn't even played in a regular season game?"

They are even funnier in the old Clausen threads.