RenoFinFan
Pro Bowler
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,113
- Reaction score
- 0
WARNING: THIS POST IS NOT FOR THE STATISTICALLY IMPAIRED!
Daunte Culpepper is considered by some to be one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. DCs 2004 season is most often referred to as “proof” of this when he put up what is considered to be one of the greatest (top 5 at least) statistical seasons ever by a QB. However, statistics are only good if the “context” is understood in which they were established. The following are Culpepper’s actual statistics for the year 2004:
379 comp, 548 att, 4717 yds, 39 TD, 11 int, 110.9 QB rating
People who think DC is overrated usually say Culpepper is a product of Randy Moss. As it so happens 2004 is the best year in order to tell what kind of effect Moss had on Culpepper. DC fans simply say subtract Moss’ stats from Culpepper in the year 2004 to see how good DC is. However, this does not give a true representation of DC. What gives the best representation is to compare DCs average game statistics when Moss played with DCs average game statistics when Moss didn’t play. Then project those over a full season (16 games) to see what the difference would be. In 2004 Moss played in 13 games. However, Two games he played in he could barely walk and was only on the field as a decoy for a couple of plays (0 catches both games), so in effect he played in only 11 games and missed 5 games.
The following are Culpepper’s statistics when Moss played and when Moss didn’t play:
With Moss = 266 comp, 382 att, 3538 yds, 30 TD, 8 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 113 comp, 166 att, 1179 yds, 9 TD, 3 int, 98.9 QB rating
The following is Culpepper’s average game when Moss played and the average game when Moss didn’t play:
With Moss = 24 comp, 35 att, 322 yds, 2.73 TD, .73 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 23 comp, 33 att, 236 yds, 1.8 TD, .6 int, 98.9 QB rating
The following is Culpepper’s projected statistics over a 16 games season had Moss played all 16 games and if Moss didn’t play at all (average game * 16).
With Moss = 387 comp, 556 att, 5146 yds, 44 TD, 11 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 362 comp, 530 att, 3770 yds, 29 TD, 12 int, 98.9 QB rating
The discrepancy in yards and TD passes would be considered a “significant difference.”
So what can one take from this? A few notes:
Clearly DC had much better numbers with Moss in the lineup than when he wasn’t. Culpepper threw almost “one” more TD pass and "86 more yards" a game on only two more attempts when Moss played. The year 2004 is considered to be the year of the QB in which the greatest numbers were ever established as the NFL strictly enforced a hands off policy on WRs.
Culpepper had one monster game against the Packers when Moss didn’t play (27 comp, 44 att, 363 yds, 4 TD, 0 int) thus raising his QB rating from 92.1 to 98.9.
Had DC not had Moss play and his projected numbers panned out DC would have finished 4th in QB rating that year behind Manning 121.1, Brees 104.8, McNabb 104.7. Furthermore, DC would have finished 5th in TD passes, and 9th in passing yards. So Culpepper would still have had a good year without Moss but not one of the greatest years ever.
Had Moss played all 16 games and his projected numbers panned out he would have broken Marino’s yards passing in a single season record.
In 2004 a lot of media reported the “Randy ratio” was in effect and this may have led to defensive coordinators assigning at least 2 DBs on him most plays. Many consider Moss to be the best decoy “ever” in the NFL.
The Vikings were 6-5 with Moss and 2-3 without him. They beat the Titans (5-11) and Lions (6-10)…and lost to the Giants (6-10) the Colts (12-4) and Packers (10-6).
What I take from this is Culpepper is good but Randy Moss has significantly contributed to Culpepper’s success and as a result Culpepper is rated much higher than he should be.
Daunte Culpepper is considered by some to be one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. DCs 2004 season is most often referred to as “proof” of this when he put up what is considered to be one of the greatest (top 5 at least) statistical seasons ever by a QB. However, statistics are only good if the “context” is understood in which they were established. The following are Culpepper’s actual statistics for the year 2004:
379 comp, 548 att, 4717 yds, 39 TD, 11 int, 110.9 QB rating
People who think DC is overrated usually say Culpepper is a product of Randy Moss. As it so happens 2004 is the best year in order to tell what kind of effect Moss had on Culpepper. DC fans simply say subtract Moss’ stats from Culpepper in the year 2004 to see how good DC is. However, this does not give a true representation of DC. What gives the best representation is to compare DCs average game statistics when Moss played with DCs average game statistics when Moss didn’t play. Then project those over a full season (16 games) to see what the difference would be. In 2004 Moss played in 13 games. However, Two games he played in he could barely walk and was only on the field as a decoy for a couple of plays (0 catches both games), so in effect he played in only 11 games and missed 5 games.
The following are Culpepper’s statistics when Moss played and when Moss didn’t play:
With Moss = 266 comp, 382 att, 3538 yds, 30 TD, 8 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 113 comp, 166 att, 1179 yds, 9 TD, 3 int, 98.9 QB rating
The following is Culpepper’s average game when Moss played and the average game when Moss didn’t play:
With Moss = 24 comp, 35 att, 322 yds, 2.73 TD, .73 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 23 comp, 33 att, 236 yds, 1.8 TD, .6 int, 98.9 QB rating
The following is Culpepper’s projected statistics over a 16 games season had Moss played all 16 games and if Moss didn’t play at all (average game * 16).
With Moss = 387 comp, 556 att, 5146 yds, 44 TD, 11 int, 116.2 QB rating
No Moss = 362 comp, 530 att, 3770 yds, 29 TD, 12 int, 98.9 QB rating
The discrepancy in yards and TD passes would be considered a “significant difference.”
So what can one take from this? A few notes:
Clearly DC had much better numbers with Moss in the lineup than when he wasn’t. Culpepper threw almost “one” more TD pass and "86 more yards" a game on only two more attempts when Moss played. The year 2004 is considered to be the year of the QB in which the greatest numbers were ever established as the NFL strictly enforced a hands off policy on WRs.
Culpepper had one monster game against the Packers when Moss didn’t play (27 comp, 44 att, 363 yds, 4 TD, 0 int) thus raising his QB rating from 92.1 to 98.9.
Had DC not had Moss play and his projected numbers panned out DC would have finished 4th in QB rating that year behind Manning 121.1, Brees 104.8, McNabb 104.7. Furthermore, DC would have finished 5th in TD passes, and 9th in passing yards. So Culpepper would still have had a good year without Moss but not one of the greatest years ever.
Had Moss played all 16 games and his projected numbers panned out he would have broken Marino’s yards passing in a single season record.
In 2004 a lot of media reported the “Randy ratio” was in effect and this may have led to defensive coordinators assigning at least 2 DBs on him most plays. Many consider Moss to be the best decoy “ever” in the NFL.
The Vikings were 6-5 with Moss and 2-3 without him. They beat the Titans (5-11) and Lions (6-10)…and lost to the Giants (6-10) the Colts (12-4) and Packers (10-6).
What I take from this is Culpepper is good but Randy Moss has significantly contributed to Culpepper’s success and as a result Culpepper is rated much higher than he should be.
