An 'accurate' MVP pick
Michael Vick could be a lock for MVP if his newfound accuracy is real. So ... is it?
By Chris Sprow
ESPN Insider
We don't hear much about the most peculiar part of Michael Vick's 2010 season. I mean the football season: the part that took place on the field and didn't have to do with morality, dogs, prison, redemption, humility, life lessons, where the commissioner wanted Vick to play or any entity you can't really measure. No, the most peculiar part of Vick's football 2010 season was how accurately he threw the football. In terms of comparison, given Vick's history, it was a Jose Bautista-like jump.
Vick is a great thrower of the football. He snaps off 40-yard darts effortlessly -- an easy, wrist-fueled fly-cast toward a rising trout -- but he has never, ever been accurate. Before last season's 62.6 completion percentage, Vick had never topped 56.4 percent in a season. To put that in perspective, Donovan McNabb, who was often (and rightly) panned in Philly for poor accuracy, never had a season worse than 57.5 percent, excluding a shortened rookie year. And even if you include last season's odd jump in his career totals, Vick ranks 36th of 38 "active" passers, safely behind the likes of David Carr, Chad Henne and Shaun Hill. Even in college, the realm of inflated totals, Vick wasn't very accurate. He completed just 56.3 percent of his throws at Virginia Tech.
But this was always the trade, right?
Vick is by no means a conventional quarterback -- even at 31, his sprinter's speed transcends the position -- and metrics like Total QBR can now put a better value on what Vick can do. It can measure both sides to the trade. To make it short: The points Vick will create with his feet, all things equal, should blow away even the best scramblers in the league. In 2010, he created about the same number of points with his legs as Aaron Rodgers, maybe the league's most effective traditional scrambler -- but Vick did it in 170 fewer plays.
<OFFER>
But accuracy has always been the trade-off, a fair purchase price for those moments of Tecmo Bowl-infused scrambling brilliance. But what if it wasn't a trade-off? What if Vick became accurate -- all of the taste, none of the calories? If so, Vick is as good an MVP candidate as you'll ever find. The question is whether he can sustain it.
A projection from AccuScore puts Vick's 2011 totals at 3,954 passing yards and 27 TDs, 712 rushing yards and 8 TDs. That projection, however, is based on Vick maintaining his newfound accuracy, and also his health. This is where history comes in.
Since the NFL-AFL merger, only a handful of other veteran quarterbacks have seen such a dramatic increase in accuracy (see chart) in one season.
<!-- begin inline 2 -->
So this is accuracy
Largest increase over previous season's best completion percentage since the merger, minimum 1,500 attempts entering season. Courtesy Elias.
<TABLE><THEAD><TR><TH>Year</TH><TH>QB</TH><TH>Team</TH><TH>Completion pct.</TH><TH>Prev best</TH><TH>Diff.</TH></TR></THEAD><TBODY><TR class=last><TD>1982</TD><TD>Steve Bartkowski</TD><TD>Falcons</TD><TD>63.4</TD><TD>55.7</TD><TD>7.6</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1973</TD><TD>Jim Hart</TD><TD>Rams</TD><TD>55.6</TD><TD>48.4</TD><TD>7.3</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>2006</TD><TD>David Carr</TD><TD>Texans</TD><TD>68.3</TD><TD>61.2</TD><TD>7.2</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1978</TD><TD>Archie Manning</TD><TD>Saints</TD><TD>61.8</TD><TD>55.1</TD><TD>6.7</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1982</TD><TD>Jim Plunkett</TD><TD>Raiders</TD><TD>58.2</TD><TD>51.9</TD><TD>6.4</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>2010</TD><TD>Michael Vick</TD><TD>Eagles</TD><TD>62.6</TD><TD>56.4</TD><TD>6.2</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- end inline 2 -->
The natural assumption is that those were outlier years. A guy had a better offensive line, a better set of receivers, a few games that totally skewed the whole percentage.
But that assumption is wrong.
In fact, every guy on the list outside of Carr went on to be even more accurate than before. After his breakthrough year, Bartkowski jumped another four percentage points a year later; Plunkett became notably more accurate; and a look at Vick's game logs shows he was consistently more accurate last year -- his highest completion percentage was 71.4. There was no 22-of-24 effort that totally skews the data.
Which certainly jibes with what Vick says of his newfound accuracy. "It's not me, it's the scheme. In the NFL, schemes make great quarterbacks," he told ESPN The Magazine. "I love Atlanta, but I wish now I would have been drafted by the Eagles." Eagles offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg heaps credit on Vick, but some evaluators are convinced the Eagles are so confident in their system they feel any good quarterback can run it with some proficiency, which is part of the reason they've dealt some competent quarterbacks over the years when the value was there.
And McNabb? Well, look at the personnel. The Eagles now run out a chorus line of dangerous targets in the pass and run game, a laughably better spread than the Todd Pinkston and Reggie Brown combo platters that seemed to define the McNabb era.
The final question is Vick's health. While he has played only 16 games once in the five seasons he's been a full-time starter, he played 15 or more games in four of them. Being mobile and getting hit is bad, but being immobile and getting hit can be worse; as we noted here, Vick still has missed fewer games as a presumed starter than Tom Brady did in 2008 alone.
Sure, Vick's accuracy could dip. He could even get hurt. But history and the numbers show something else -- he might just be more accurate now. Sometimes, it appears, the Jose Bautistas of football do just keep on hitting home runs.
Michael Vick could be a lock for MVP if his newfound accuracy is real. So ... is it?
By Chris Sprow
ESPN Insider
We don't hear much about the most peculiar part of Michael Vick's 2010 season. I mean the football season: the part that took place on the field and didn't have to do with morality, dogs, prison, redemption, humility, life lessons, where the commissioner wanted Vick to play or any entity you can't really measure. No, the most peculiar part of Vick's football 2010 season was how accurately he threw the football. In terms of comparison, given Vick's history, it was a Jose Bautista-like jump.
Vick is a great thrower of the football. He snaps off 40-yard darts effortlessly -- an easy, wrist-fueled fly-cast toward a rising trout -- but he has never, ever been accurate. Before last season's 62.6 completion percentage, Vick had never topped 56.4 percent in a season. To put that in perspective, Donovan McNabb, who was often (and rightly) panned in Philly for poor accuracy, never had a season worse than 57.5 percent, excluding a shortened rookie year. And even if you include last season's odd jump in his career totals, Vick ranks 36th of 38 "active" passers, safely behind the likes of David Carr, Chad Henne and Shaun Hill. Even in college, the realm of inflated totals, Vick wasn't very accurate. He completed just 56.3 percent of his throws at Virginia Tech.
But this was always the trade, right?
Vick is by no means a conventional quarterback -- even at 31, his sprinter's speed transcends the position -- and metrics like Total QBR can now put a better value on what Vick can do. It can measure both sides to the trade. To make it short: The points Vick will create with his feet, all things equal, should blow away even the best scramblers in the league. In 2010, he created about the same number of points with his legs as Aaron Rodgers, maybe the league's most effective traditional scrambler -- but Vick did it in 170 fewer plays.
<OFFER>
But accuracy has always been the trade-off, a fair purchase price for those moments of Tecmo Bowl-infused scrambling brilliance. But what if it wasn't a trade-off? What if Vick became accurate -- all of the taste, none of the calories? If so, Vick is as good an MVP candidate as you'll ever find. The question is whether he can sustain it.
A projection from AccuScore puts Vick's 2011 totals at 3,954 passing yards and 27 TDs, 712 rushing yards and 8 TDs. That projection, however, is based on Vick maintaining his newfound accuracy, and also his health. This is where history comes in.
Since the NFL-AFL merger, only a handful of other veteran quarterbacks have seen such a dramatic increase in accuracy (see chart) in one season.
<!-- begin inline 2 -->
So this is accuracy
Largest increase over previous season's best completion percentage since the merger, minimum 1,500 attempts entering season. Courtesy Elias.
<TABLE><THEAD><TR><TH>Year</TH><TH>QB</TH><TH>Team</TH><TH>Completion pct.</TH><TH>Prev best</TH><TH>Diff.</TH></TR></THEAD><TBODY><TR class=last><TD>1982</TD><TD>Steve Bartkowski</TD><TD>Falcons</TD><TD>63.4</TD><TD>55.7</TD><TD>7.6</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1973</TD><TD>Jim Hart</TD><TD>Rams</TD><TD>55.6</TD><TD>48.4</TD><TD>7.3</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>2006</TD><TD>David Carr</TD><TD>Texans</TD><TD>68.3</TD><TD>61.2</TD><TD>7.2</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1978</TD><TD>Archie Manning</TD><TD>Saints</TD><TD>61.8</TD><TD>55.1</TD><TD>6.7</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>1982</TD><TD>Jim Plunkett</TD><TD>Raiders</TD><TD>58.2</TD><TD>51.9</TD><TD>6.4</TD></TR><TR class=last><TD>2010</TD><TD>Michael Vick</TD><TD>Eagles</TD><TD>62.6</TD><TD>56.4</TD><TD>6.2</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- end inline 2 -->
The natural assumption is that those were outlier years. A guy had a better offensive line, a better set of receivers, a few games that totally skewed the whole percentage.
But that assumption is wrong.
In fact, every guy on the list outside of Carr went on to be even more accurate than before. After his breakthrough year, Bartkowski jumped another four percentage points a year later; Plunkett became notably more accurate; and a look at Vick's game logs shows he was consistently more accurate last year -- his highest completion percentage was 71.4. There was no 22-of-24 effort that totally skews the data.
Which certainly jibes with what Vick says of his newfound accuracy. "It's not me, it's the scheme. In the NFL, schemes make great quarterbacks," he told ESPN The Magazine. "I love Atlanta, but I wish now I would have been drafted by the Eagles." Eagles offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg heaps credit on Vick, but some evaluators are convinced the Eagles are so confident in their system they feel any good quarterback can run it with some proficiency, which is part of the reason they've dealt some competent quarterbacks over the years when the value was there.
And McNabb? Well, look at the personnel. The Eagles now run out a chorus line of dangerous targets in the pass and run game, a laughably better spread than the Todd Pinkston and Reggie Brown combo platters that seemed to define the McNabb era.
The final question is Vick's health. While he has played only 16 games once in the five seasons he's been a full-time starter, he played 15 or more games in four of them. Being mobile and getting hit is bad, but being immobile and getting hit can be worse; as we noted here, Vick still has missed fewer games as a presumed starter than Tom Brady did in 2008 alone.
Sure, Vick's accuracy could dip. He could even get hurt. But history and the numbers show something else -- he might just be more accurate now. Sometimes, it appears, the Jose Bautistas of football do just keep on hitting home runs.
