I went searching for a site that would tell me the success rate of "draft gurus" in predicting the #1 pick. I didn't find it. What I did find was a a site that presents a new formula for predicting QB success based on multiple statistics and other factors. The author, R.C. Fischer, acknowledges the "Parcells" formula, as well as the "26-27-60" rule, noting that both have produced a success rate of about 50%. However, he has come up with his own formula that would, based on historical success, provide a 70%+ successful prediction rate. Follow this link to the website:
Curious yet? Keep reading...
UPDATE: I sent an e-mail to R. C. Fischer to ensure he had no problem with my posting his results so far. I received the following response this afternoon (I highlighted certain relevant comments):
I appreciate you noting my article on the QB group and Stanzi etc in your work, so please feel free. Thank you for the heads up on it.The rest of the QB analysis is coming out every day or two over the next week or so, WRs, and TEs. Feel free to link or cite any of them that you wish. We appreciate the acknowledgements.will be the next QB, likely followed Ponder and Chris Dieker (who?). After the QBs, then it is time to report out on our similar system for RBs,If it is OK, I will note your work on it/use of our stuff in an email blast and Facebook blast to our folks...linking to your work on it if you'd like. Any time you want to note any of our work, I can put it in a blast to our group -- so just let me know.Being a "Saw" fan myself, and also thinking my readers will have interest of what Panthers fans are thinking on the # 1 pick, I could blast that article out too if you were OK with it.scoring, and about 15+ new QBs researched/added, will be out on our next overall ratings update in about a week, spoiler alert it was not good.I have been getting a lot of "strange looks" on Tony Pike being on that upper list. I had no emotional attachment to him before, now I'm really intrigued because if our algorithm/system makes a great call on Tony Pike...then I would be in even more in love with our formula! We'll see. With no reliable Wonderlic score on Pike, that's the big X-factor. I have him in at a neutral score/safe for now, but if it is truly weak/bad..."down goes Pike" in our ratings to mediocrity projections.Thanks again for heads up and the kind words about our research.RC
There's more info on the website, but what I present below does, I think, provide an accurate context.
The Fischer formula is based on the college careers and physical attributes of Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger and Rivers, and examines what they have in common. As he states, "The core data that is the foundation for my mathematical system to judge College QBs is as follows (not going into exact detail for many reasons, seeking fortune by having something no else does is the main one...). I certainly can't blame him for that. Here are the basic measurables he has come up with:
KEY MATCHUPS – the first thing I do is throw out ridiculous games (which typically leads to ridiculous results) or in other words, throw out games/stats against horrible teams on their schedule. We look at only logical games (to not be subjective on that, we just look at games against teams with winning records), which reduces the sample of a season to somewhere between 6-10 games for any QB. We only look at games played in their final year, not the entire body of work.
WEIGHTED MATCHUPS – playing big games on the road, playing top teams (and/or defenses) in the college ranks within their season, that’s worth looking at harder. I use strength of opponent for judging an individual games value for statistically rating a QB. A matchup against a Top-10 team is worth a lot more "weight" than their matchup against a 6-6 barely qualified for a Bowl Game matchup.
PEFORMANCE PER ATTEMPT – A 300-yard passing game in 30 pass attempts, is that not similar to a 200-yard passing game in 20 attempts?…or more to the point a 400-yard game in 40 attempts? It's all still 10 yards per pass attempt? For that matter 2 passing TDs in 20 Pass Attempts is the essentially the same performance as 3 passing TDs in 30 Pass Attempts. Colt Brennan and Graham Harrell should not have an advantage over Tom Brady because they throw 40+ times a game and compile bigger stats. We look at Passing yards, Passing TDs and INTs through the lens of the number of completions and attempts...not game compilations. Quality, not quantity.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS – Height, Hand-size, arm length are some items we look at. Speed plays no factor. Do any of the elite NFL QBs of today exude any big speed? Mobility is not a characteristic of most/all elite QB (please no Michael Vick yet, we’ll get to that).
WONDERLIC/IQ – an unavoidable and a key data point we have access to on basic IQ and problem solving. There is a definite correlation to low Wonderlic scores and QB disappointment.
He then shows how his formula has fared in recent drafts:
Fischer's disclaimer: These (above) are all things that are "known" and quantifiable, and measurable back to the past. What I don't know...I don't know, and can't consider. A pending character issue/flaw, or a hidden injury -- we can't really quantify that.
Note that all 6 of his "elite" QBs rate above the 0.900 mark. Definitely a couple of misses (Alex Smith - so far, Leftwich - injuries, Kolb - tbd). Check out who scored 0.879, and that's not even my big surprise.
He also shows the list of players below this mark, and while there are a some good ones, they mostly suck. Unfortunately, it's also still a work in progress, and apparently Jimmy hasn't been loaded yet. We'll have to keep checking for updates.
So far Fischer's only run 4 of the top QBs in the 2011 draft through his formula. Read his surprising results in the following links:
And now prepare to be AMAZED (if you believe any of this stuff), but how can you really argue with a 75% hit rate?
I found this interesting, for what it's worth. So, what think you, Panther fans. Should we start hitching up another wagon? In case you're interested here's a couple of more links: