NFL · Empirical Bayes

True-Talent Leaderboards

A raw single-season rate is a noisy guess at a player’s real ability, and the noise is worst for the smallest samples — so a naïve leaderboard is topped by whoever got lucky in the fewest tries. This one shrinks every rate toward its position-group prior by how much the sample can be trusted, and shows a 90% credible interval instead of a point. Toggle raw vs. shrunk to watch the flukes fall back to the pack.

Completion % · 2016

Completions per pass attempt. Depth-of-target confound: a checkdown offense completes more. Pair with CPOE.

Beats raw by
15.6%
lower out-of-sample error
RMSE raw → shrunk
5.2% → 4.4%
odd vs. even weeks
Split-half reliability
0.42
how repeatable the raw stat is
Stabilizes at
148
attempts to trust the number
shrunkrawthe shrink90% CI
50%55%60%65%avg1Drew BreesNO · 70265.6%2Sam BradfordMIN · 59065.3%3Matt RyanATL · 57563.6%4Tom BradyNE · 44963.3%5Kirk CousinsWAS · 63163.3%6Brian HoyerCHI · 20462.8%7Dak PrescottDAL · 48662.8%8Alex SmithKC · 51962.2%9Aaron RodgersGB · 64761.4%10Ryan TannehillMIA · 42061.3%11Joe FlaccoBAL · 71061.0%12Derek AndersonCAR · 5460.9%13Matthew StaffordDET · 63360.8%14Derek CarrLV · 58260.8%15Ben RoethlisbergerPIT · 53560.8%16Jimmy GaroppoloNE · 6660.7%17Eli ManningNYG · 61960.5%18Matt MooreMIA · 8860.2%19Andy DaltonCIN · 60460.0%20Russell WilsonSEA · 58959.7%21Nick FolesKC · 5959.4%22Carson WentzPHI · 64358.9%23Tom SavageHOU · 7858.8%24Landry JonesPIT · 9058.8%25Andrew LuckIND · 58958.7%26Cody KesslerCLE · 21858.7%27Scott TolzienIND · 4058.5%28Matt BarkleyCHI · 22258.4%29Marcus MariotaTEN · 47858.0%30Jacoby BrissettNE · 6157.9%31Jameis WinstonTB · 60757.2%

Each row is a player: the solid dot is the shrunk estimate, the hollow dot the raw rate, joined by the red pull of regression; the grey bar is the 90% credible interval. A hollow shrunk dot means the sample is below the stabilization line — the number is mostly the position prior. Switch to Raw rank and watch the small-sample names climb.

Completion % · 2016 · full board

Completion % leaderboard for the 2016 NFL season, shrunk by empirical Bayes with 90% credible intervals, ranked by the shrunk estimate.
#PlayerTeamPosattemptsRawShrunk90% interval
1Drew BreesNOQB70267.1%65.6%62.9%68.3%
2Sam BradfordMINQB59067.0%65.3%62.4%68.2%
3Matt RyanATLQB57564.9%63.6%60.7%66.5%
4Tom BradyNEQB44964.8%63.3%60.0%66.5%
5Kirk CousinsWASQB63164.3%63.3%60.4%66.1%
6Brian HoyerCHIQB20465.7%62.8%58.5%67.0%
7Dak PrescottDALQB48664.0%62.8%59.6%65.9%
8Alex SmithKCQB51963.2%62.2%59.1%65.3%
9Aaron RodgersGBQB64762.0%61.4%58.5%64.2%
10Ryan TannehillMIAQB42062.1%61.3%57.9%64.6%
11Joe FlaccoBALQB71061.4%61.0%58.2%63.7%
12Derek Anderson◦ provisionalCARQB5466.7%60.9%55.2%66.4%
13Matthew StaffordDETQB63361.3%60.8%57.9%63.7%
14Derek CarrLVQB58261.3%60.8%57.8%63.8%
15Ben RoethlisbergerPITQB53561.3%60.8%57.7%63.8%
16Jimmy Garoppolo◦ provisionalNEQB6665.1%60.7%55.2%66.1%
17Eli ManningNYGQB61960.9%60.5%57.6%63.4%
18Matt Moore◦ provisionalMIAQB8862.5%60.2%54.9%65.3%
19Andy DaltonCINQB60460.3%60.0%57.0%62.9%
20Russell WilsonSEAQB58959.9%59.7%56.7%62.6%
21Nick Foles◦ provisionalKCQB5961.0%59.4%53.7%65.0%
22Carson WentzPHIQB64358.9%58.9%56.0%61.8%
23Tom Savage◦ provisionalHOUQB7859.0%58.8%53.4%64.2%
24Landry Jones◦ provisionalPITQB9058.9%58.8%53.5%64.0%
25Andrew LuckINDQB58958.7%58.7%55.8%61.7%
26Cody KesslerCLEQB21858.7%58.7%54.5%62.9%
27Scott Tolzien◦ provisionalINDQB4057.5%58.5%52.5%64.3%
28Matt BarkleyCHIQB22258.1%58.4%54.1%62.5%
29Marcus MariotaTENQB47857.7%58.0%54.7%61.2%
30Jacoby Brissett◦ provisionalNEQB6155.7%57.9%52.2%63.4%
31Charlie Whitehurst◦ provisionalCLEQB2751.8%57.7%51.5%63.8%
32Shaun Hill◦ provisionalMINQB3652.8%57.6%51.5%63.5%
33Case KeenumLAQB34556.8%57.4%53.7%61.0%
34Kevin Hogan◦ provisionalCLEQB2850.0%57.4%51.2%63.4%
35Matt Cassel◦ provisionalTENQB5653.6%57.3%51.6%63.0%
36Jameis WinstonTBQB60756.8%57.2%54.2%60.2%
37Carson PalmerARIQB64156.8%57.1%54.3%60.0%
38Philip RiversLACQB61656.7%57.1%54.1%60.0%
39Tyrod TaylorBUFQB47956.2%56.8%53.5%60.0%
40Paxton Lynch◦ provisionalDENQB9253.3%56.6%51.4%61.9%
41Brock OsweilerHOUQB53756.0%56.6%53.5%59.7%
42Trevor SiemianDENQB51855.8%56.5%53.3%59.6%
43Blake BortlesJAXQB66055.8%56.3%53.4%59.2%
44Blaine GabbertSFQB17153.2%55.8%51.2%60.3%
45Jay CutlerCHIQB15452.6%55.6%50.9%60.3%
46Ryan FitzpatrickNYJQB42254.0%55.3%51.8%58.7%
47Bryce Petty◦ provisionalNYJQB14651.4%55.1%50.3%59.8%
48EJ Manuel◦ provisionalBUFQB3036.7%55.0%48.9%61.1%
49Colin KaepernickSFQB36753.4%54.9%51.3%58.5%
50Robert Griffin IIICLEQB16951.5%54.9%50.3%59.5%
51Drew Stanton◦ provisionalARIQB4938.8%53.8%47.9%59.6%
52Josh McCownCLEQB18448.9%53.3%48.8%57.8%
53Jared GoffLAQB23148.5%52.5%48.3%56.7%
54Cam NewtonCARQB55049.1%51.1%48.0%54.3%

How the shrinkage works

Two estimators

Rate stats (completion %, success rate, catch rate) use a beta-binomial model: a Beta(α, β) prior fit by marginal likelihood over each position group, then a Beta posterior per player. Per-play averages (EPA, CPOE, yards) use a normal-normal model with DerSimonian–Laird between-player variance. Both pull each player toward their group by exactly how thin their sample is.

Does it help? & the fine print

The trust panel’s numbers come from a leakage-free odd/even-week holdout: fit on odd weeks, predict even-week raw. Shrinkage lowers out-of-sample error for every stat. Priors are fit per season and per position (WR and TE separately), so a TE’s baseline isn’t a skill. Regular season only, 2016–2025. Rushing and receiving efficiency are heavily scheme-driven — read the wide bands as the honesty they are.

Source: nflverse play-by-play. Counted and computed deterministically — never modeled by a language model. Built by build_nfl_leaderboards.py (byte-reproducible).