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.

Dropback success rate · 2016

Share of dropbacks (incl. sacks & scrambles) with positive EPA.

Beats raw by
15.6%
lower out-of-sample error
RMSE raw → shrunk
5.5% → 4.6%
odd vs. even weeks
Split-half reliability
0.47
how repeatable the raw stat is
Stabilizes at
160
dropbacks to trust the number
shrunkrawthe shrink90% CI
35%40%45%50%55%avg1Matt RyanATL · 57551.6%2Kirk CousinsWAS · 62850.6%3Drew BreesNO · 69550.2%4Dak PrescottDAL · 48449.5%5Derek AndersonCAR · 5449.1%6Tom BradyNE · 44848.9%7Matt BarkleyCHI · 22248.5%8Brian HoyerCHI · 20247.8%9Andrew LuckIND · 58647.7%10Matthew StaffordDET · 63047.5%11Jameis WinstonTB · 60747.5%12Ben RoethlisbergerPIT · 53247.4%13Andy DaltonCIN · 60247.4%14Aaron RodgersGB · 64547.1%15Russell WilsonSEA · 58747.0%16Jimmy GaroppoloNE · 6647.0%17Sam BradfordMIN · 59046.9%18Matt MooreMIA · 8746.6%19Carson PalmerARI · 63946.6%20Alex SmithKC · 51846.2%21Marcus MariotaTEN · 47545.9%22Shaun HillMIN · 3645.5%23Ryan TannehillMIA · 41845.4%24Derek CarrLV · 58045.3%25Philip RiversLAC · 61545.2%26Charlie WhitehurstCLE · 2745.0%27Brock OsweilerHOU · 53444.7%28Paxton LynchDEN · 9144.7%29Eli ManningNYG · 61944.3%30EJ ManuelBUF · 3044.3%31Trevor SiemianDEN · 51844.0%

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.

Dropback success rate · 2016 · full board

Dropback success rate leaderboard for the 2016 NFL season, shrunk by empirical Bayes with 90% credible intervals, ranked by the shrunk estimate.
#PlayerTeamPosdropbacksRawShrunk90% interval
1Matt RyanATLQB57553.4%51.6%48.5%54.6%
2Kirk CousinsWASQB62852.1%50.6%47.7%53.6%
3Drew BreesNOQB69551.4%50.2%47.4%53.0%
4Dak PrescottDALQB48451.0%49.5%46.3%52.8%
5Derek Anderson◦ provisionalCARQB5461.1%49.1%43.5%54.7%
6Tom BradyNEQB44850.2%48.9%45.5%52.2%
7Matt BarkleyCHIQB22250.9%48.5%44.3%52.7%
8Brian HoyerCHIQB20250.0%47.8%43.5%52.1%
9Andrew LuckINDQB58648.5%47.7%44.7%50.7%
10Matthew StaffordDETQB63048.1%47.5%44.6%50.4%
11Jameis WinstonTBQB60748.1%47.5%44.5%50.4%
12Ben RoethlisbergerPITQB53248.1%47.4%44.3%50.5%
13Andy DaltonCINQB60248.0%47.4%44.4%50.4%
14Aaron RodgersGBQB64547.6%47.1%44.2%50.0%
15Russell WilsonSEAQB58747.5%47.0%44.0%50.0%
16Jimmy Garoppolo◦ provisionalNEQB6651.5%47.0%41.5%52.4%
17Sam BradfordMINQB59047.5%46.9%44.0%50.0%
18Matt Moore◦ provisionalMIAQB8749.4%46.6%41.4%51.8%
19Carson PalmerARIQB63946.9%46.6%43.7%49.5%
20Alex SmithKCQB51846.5%46.2%43.0%49.3%
21Marcus MariotaTENQB47546.1%45.9%42.6%49.1%
22Shaun Hill◦ provisionalMINQB3647.2%45.5%39.7%51.3%
23Ryan TannehillMIAQB41845.5%45.4%42.0%48.8%
24Derek CarrLVQB58045.3%45.3%42.3%48.3%
25Philip RiversLACQB61545.2%45.2%42.3%48.1%
26Charlie Whitehurst◦ provisionalCLEQB2744.4%45.0%39.1%51.0%
27Brock OsweilerHOUQB53444.6%44.7%41.6%47.8%
28Paxton Lynch◦ provisionalDENQB9144.0%44.7%39.5%49.9%
29Eli ManningNYGQB61944.1%44.3%41.4%47.2%
30EJ Manuel◦ provisionalBUFQB3040.0%44.3%38.4%50.2%
31Landry Jones◦ provisionalPITQB8942.7%44.2%39.1%49.4%
32Scott Tolzien◦ provisionalINDQB4040.0%44.1%38.3%49.9%
33Trevor SiemianDENQB51843.6%44.0%40.8%47.1%
34Carson WentzPHIQB64143.5%43.8%41.0%46.7%
35Cody KesslerCLEQB21742.9%43.8%39.6%48.0%
36Tom Savage◦ provisionalHOUQB7841.0%43.8%38.5%49.1%
37Tyrod TaylorBUFQB47843.1%43.6%40.4%46.8%
38Joe FlaccoBALQB70343.2%43.6%40.8%46.4%
39Matt Cassel◦ provisionalTENQB5438.9%43.5%38.0%49.1%
40Kevin Hogan◦ provisionalCLEQB2832.1%43.1%37.3%49.1%
41Ryan FitzpatrickNYJQB42242.2%43.0%39.6%46.4%
42Nick Foles◦ provisionalKCQB5935.6%42.5%37.1%48.0%
43Blake BortlesJAXQB66041.7%42.3%39.5%45.2%
44Cam NewtonCARQB54741.5%42.3%39.3%45.4%
45Jacoby Brissett◦ provisionalNEQB6134.4%42.1%36.7%47.6%
46Jay Cutler◦ provisionalCHIQB15439.0%42.1%37.5%46.7%
47Colin KaepernickSFQB36639.9%41.5%38.0%45.0%
48Josh McCownCLEQB18338.3%41.4%37.1%45.8%
49Drew Stanton◦ provisionalARIQB4829.2%41.4%35.9%47.1%
50Bryce Petty◦ provisionalNYJQB14636.3%40.9%36.3%45.5%
51Case KeenumLAQB34538.6%40.6%37.0%44.2%
52Blaine GabbertSFQB17136.3%40.5%36.1%45.0%
53Robert Griffin IIICLEQB16933.7%39.3%34.9%43.7%
54Jared GoffLAQB23030.4%36.4%32.5%40.5%

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).