Was This Really McNabb's Second Best Season?

"Donovan McNabb just submitted the second best season of his career."

We've heard that line a lot recently.  I've used it myself a few times.  But is it really true?

Let's find out.

For the purposes of this post, the words "why" and "because" don't exist.  I'm not looking to explain the reasons why McNabb had the season he did.  There will, in fact, be nothing in these numbers that will move the "why" discussion forward even an inch.  This will just be the facts.

---

The case for this being McNabb's second best season is pretty straightforward:

 

The 2004 season was clearly his best statistical effort.  Among the contenders for season number two, 2006 offered a slightly better QB rating, while 2008 saw better marks for yards and touchdowns.

The McNabb of 2009 would easily have bested those 2008 numbers, however, had he simply played a 16 game season.  Combine that with the greatly improved YPA mark and it's not really a contest.  And for as great as McNabb's first 10 games in 2006 were, no one's going to put a season that ended with fans clamoring for the return of Jeff Garcia at the top of Donovan's list.

It's a pretty simple case.  The only problem is Home Run Baker.

Beginning in 1911, Frank "Home Run" Baker led the AL in home runs for four straight years.  His totals?

1911 - 11 
1912 - 10
1913 - 12
1914 - 9

Six years after Baker's last home run title, a first-year Yankee named Babe Ruth hit 54.  The game had changed.

Something similar -- albeit less drastic -- has happened in football over the 11 years of Donovan McNabb's career.  Consider the following table, which shows his completion percentages for the years 2000-2009:

Not bad.  All those folks who said McNabb would never be a 60 percent passer ended up being wrong.

But here's the problem:*

That's remarkable consistency.  You have one year that's a true outlier.  Every other year is pretty much the same.

And this, right here, is the problem with only comparing McNabb against his own stats.  Quarterback performances have improved.  Whether that's because there are more good QBs or the existing QBs got better or just because the rules changed doesn't really matter here.  What does is recognizing that a quarterback with top three stats in 2002 might not even have a case to make this year's Pro Bowl with the same numbers.

Here's a different chart, similar idea.  McNabb accumulated a quarterback rating of 92.9 this season.  Over the course of his career, here's where that would have have ranked him among the top 20 QBs each season:

Back in 2001-2003, a 92.9 quarterback rating would have suggested the player was one of the league's elite QBs (2000 was like a murderer's row of guys having career years).  Fast forward to 2009, and 92.9 doesn't even put you in the top 10.  (Not quite gold, better than silver.)

McNabb's actual QB ratings and his rank each year:

 

I'm running the risk of belaboring the point, but let's do one more.  McNabb had a yards per attempt figure this year of 8.0.  Historically speaking, hitting the 8.0 mark is quite an accomplishment.  Here's how a quarterback with an 8.0 YPA would have ranked each year (again, among the top 20):

Yep.  Not as special in 2009 (although still very good).  And note as well the way McNabb's other best season -- 2004 -- was also a big year for the rest of the league as well.

So what's the bottom line?  This:

Those are McNabb's ranks in five major categories as compared to each season's top 20 QBs.  There's nothing scientific about the table.  I grabbed the numbers that seemed like they made sense to use and I went with per-game figures for yards and touchdowns to control for the injuries.

What the table suggests is that once McNabb established himself (2001-2002), he was barely a top 10 passer, but he paired that ability with a seriously dangerous running threat.  The 2003 season was a down year (and pretty much the reason Andy decided he needed to go get TO).  The numbers from 2004-2006 suggest we were looking at a top five guy, although the running threat was mostly gone and he couldn't stay healthy the last two years.  Also, the efficiency stats weren't nearly as good in 2005, which isn't that surprising given everything that went on that year.

The last three years?  It's back to the bottom of the top 10 in terms of passing, with almost zero threat to run the ball.

As I promised above, I'm not going to get into the question of why these numbers seem to work out this way, which means I also can't predict what we might see from McNabb in 2010 if he's still wearing a Philadelpia Eagles jersey.

But it sure makes one think.

Much more to come this summer long miserable offseason on this topic, for sure.

---

* Note on methodology.  For almost every chart in this post, I pulled the statistics of the 20 quarterbacks each year who a) qualified for league rankings and b) finished in the top 20 in QB rating.  That seems like a reasonable way to make sure we're pulling in every good quarterback without wasting too much time studying the dreck.