Just how good is/was Drew Brees?

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,671
I understand what you're arguing, but we know that a baseball player's impact is far far far far less than a quarterback's.
Obviously, and we all accept that Mike Trout can be the best player in baseball and if the team around him sucks, his team isn't going anywhere. In football, the QB has much greater control over the outcome of the game, but that doesn't mean the same phenomena is not possible. A great QB can lead a team with a pretty crappy defense to the playoffs. However, pair that QB with a historically bad defense, and maybe they can miss the playoffs. Brees' numbers from when he went 7-9 are really not that different from when he won 10+ games; the difference is in the defensive performance of the team.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Obviously, and we all accept that Mike Trout can be the best player in baseball and if the team around him sucks, his team isn't going anywhere. In football, the QB has much greater control over the outcome of the game, but that doesn't mean the same phenomena is not possible. A great QB can lead a team with a pretty crappy defense to the playoffs. However, pair that QB with a historically bad defense, and maybe they can miss the playoffs. Brees' numbers from when he went 7-9 are really not that different from when he won 10+ games; the difference is in the defensive performance of the team.
Agreed. I mean, Marino was the best player in the league for a few years and they didn't win it all. But it's telling that other great QBs led teams with terrible defenses to the playoffs; yet every time Brees had a terrible defense, the team was sub-.500. There's probably enough data points that there might be something there.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,846
Agreed. I mean, Marino was the best player in the league for a few years and they didn't win it all. But it's telling that other great QBs led teams with terrible defenses to the playoffs; yet every time Brees had a terrible defense, the team was sub-.500. There's probably enough data points that there might be something there.
While every time the Saints were sub-.500 they had a terrible defense, the converse is not true. In 2011, they went 13-3 with a defense ranked 24th in DVOA.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,671
And we aren't just talking very bad defense here; we are talking about some historically bad stuff on some of these teams, as Super Nomario posted about above. I know maybe the Pats had some lousy defenses with Brady, but let us not compare defenses led by Bill Belichick and defenses led by Rob Ryan.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
And we aren't just talking very bad defense here; we are talking about some historically bad stuff on some of these teams, as Super Nomario posted about above. I know maybe the Pats had some lousy defenses with Brady, but let us not compare defenses led by Bill Belichick and defenses led by Rob Ryan.
Lol, the 2011 Patriots defense had Matthew Slater and Julian Edelman playing meaningful playoff snaps, it was about as bad as any defense Drew Brees has ever had.
 

Average Game James

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
4,346
Brees is a 1 time all pro, 0 mvp, 1 super bowl win guy, who really only had a single time in his entire career that you would argue he was the best quarterback.
I think this is a little unfair when you consider his main contemporaries are Brady and Manning, arguably the #1 and #2 QBs in history. He did only make one first-team all-pro, but he also made 2nd team four times, and I hardly consider it a knock against him that he spent a big chunk of his career as the #3 behind Brady and Peyton.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
I think this is a little unfair when you consider his main contemporaries are Brady and Manning, arguably the #1 and #2 QBs in history. He did only make one first-team all-pro, but he also made 2nd team four times, and I hardly consider it a knock against him that he spent a big chunk of his career as the #3 behind Brady and Peyton.
He's overlapped with Rodgers for ~2/3 of his career and I don't think they belong in the same conversation. Brees has all the counting stats, but Rodgers has been much better on a per-play basis despite a huge weather disadvantage and is about to get his third MVP.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,436
First ballot of hall-of-famer. Maybe should have retired after 2018.

I have Rodgers (and Brady) above him. Rodgers and Brady in my mind should be unanimous 1st ballot.

Not sure about Brees v. Peyton. I'm a little biased though. (Hate Peyton like(d) Brees)

Fake Edit: Rudy's Curve says it better.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I never have had any football hate for Brees but I have for Peyton for obvious reasons.

But Peyton was better.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,436
Out of the ones I've seen (not counting SSS like Mahomes)

Brady
Rodgers
Montana

Brees/Peyton
Peyton/Brees

Elway
Marino
Young
Aikman
Favre


Rapist Ben



Eli



Rivers
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
This is not a good comp, because Brees never had a dominant stretch like Maddux did from 1992-1995. Maddux was the game's undisputed best pitcher for four years in a row. Brees never peaked that high.
100%. Maddux was ridiculous in that time period; Brees never had a stretch like that.

Maddux also had a memorably distinctive style with his two-hour 85-pitch shutouts. That's one of the things that's hard on Brees in these legacy conversations, he was a death-by-a-thousand-paper cuts guy and he didn't have a distinctive style or a ton of memorable moments. Even the year the Saints won the Super Bowl, the two biggest plays of their postseason were Favre and Manning's late-game interceptions.
I disagree here. Brees stands out for being very short for a top quarterback and for succeeding despite a weak arm. He did it with outstanding accuracy (he's maybe the most accurate QB ever), touch on deep balls (he's been more of a dink-and-dunk guy the last 3 or 4 seasons but he had a great deep ball before that), and anticipation / smarts. In that way he's kind of similar to Maddux: excellent at the subtle skills despite underwhelming physical traits.

It should also be noted: the Saints were an absolute joke before he and Payton arrived in 2006. In the NFL since 1967, they didn't win their first playoff game until 2000! Eight times in franchise history they've made it past the Wild Card round; seven of those were with Brees at the helm.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,892
Alexandria, VA
This is not a good comp, because Brees never had a dominant stretch like Maddux did from 1992-1995. Maddux was the game's undisputed best pitcher for four years in a row. Brees never peaked that high.
Not just “best in the game right now”; Maddux's 1994–1995 is arguably the best two-year stretch any pitcher has had in MLB history (up there with Pedro's 1999–2000 and Walter Johnson's 1912–1913).

I'm a very small Hall person in general; to be a HOFer, you should be one of the top 2 players at your position for a decade, give or take. Or you should be someone who would normally be that, but for playing during a time that's particularly deep. Or you should have an outside impact such that your Fame exceeds what would be indicated by purely on-field performance.

Brees is pretty much the definition of a borderline candidate to me. He never met the former criteria: Brady/Manning in his early career and Brady/Rodgers in his older years were a tick ahead of him. And he isn't someone who's going to gain bonus Fame points based on outside factors: he's not Unitas revolutionizing the passing game, or Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier, or Jordan marketing the NBA at a high level (not that they necessarily need bonus points, but they've got them to spare).

The middle factor is debatable; I could go either way. Between Marino, Montana, and Young, he's probably #3 in the league again for most of the 80s and 90s, though. I probably put him in, just based on QBs being important enough to be slightly overrepresented relative to other positions, but I wouldn't cry if he didn't make it.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Lol, the 2011 Patriots defense had Matthew Slater and Julian Edelman playing meaningful playoff snaps, it was about as bad as any defense Drew Brees has ever had.
No, not close. That 2011 defense was really bad, but it was a classic bend- don't- break. They gave up a ton of yards (most per drive) but only 26 TD passes, and they hauled in 23 picks, #2 in the NFL.

The Saints? Even more yards, a whopping 7.9 yards per attempt (2011 Pats were 7.1), FORTY FIVE TDs vs only 9 interceptions. They turned the average QB into an MVP candidate ... and they had the NFL's worst run defense to boot (4.9 YPC). There's a big difference between bad and All-Time Bad.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
The 2015 Saints D was all-time bad, but for the rest of that stretch they were run of the mill lousy. From 2012-2016 they were 27th, 7th, 27th, 32nd and 28th in DVOA. That's bad, not "keep a top 5 all-time QB out of the playoffs" bad. It's also not like he's Aaron Rodgers, whose career has been wasted playing under a lousy HC (or even Manning who spent his career playing for HCs who were just ok).

The same playing conditions that juiced Brees' stats also makes his defense look extra bad. He's an easy HOF'er, but should never be mentioned in the upper echelon of all-time QBs.
 

moretsyndrome

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2006
2,179
Pawtucket
Not just “best in the game right now”; Maddux's 1994–1995 is arguably the best two-year stretch any pitcher has had in MLB history (up there with Pedro's 1999–2000 and Walter Johnson's 1912–1913).

I'm a very small Hall person in general; to be a HOFer, you should be one of the top 2 players at your position for a decade, give or take. Or you should be someone who would normally be that, but for playing during a time that's particularly deep. Or you should have an outside impact such that your Fame exceeds what would be indicated by purely on-field performance.

Brees is pretty much the definition of a borderline candidate to me. He never met the former criteria: Brady/Manning in his early career and Brady/Rodgers in his older years were a tick ahead of him. And he isn't someone who's going to gain bonus Fame points based on outside factors: he's not Unitas revolutionizing the passing game, or Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier, or Jordan marketing the NBA at a high level (not that they necessarily need bonus points, but they've got them to spare).

The middle factor is debatable; I could go either way. Between Marino, Montana, and Young, he's probably #3 in the league again for most of the 80s and 90s, though. I probably put him in, just based on QBs being important enough to be slightly overrepresented relative to other positions, but I wouldn't cry if he didn't make it.
I would prefer a small Hall as well, and tend to agree with your general standard of ~Top 2 for ~10 years. It works very well for, say, MLB catcher, but I think at positions like NFL QB and MLB starting pitcher you have to expand that first criterion a little bit beyond top 2. And I think that's where Brees gets into Canton pretty easily.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
The 2015 Saints D was all-time bad, but for the rest of that stretch they were run of the mill lousy. From 2012-2016 they were 27th, 7th, 27th, 32nd and 28th in DVOA. That's bad, not "keep a top 5 all-time QB out of the playoffs" bad. It's also not like he's Aaron Rodgers, whose career has been wasted playing under a lousy HC (or even Manning who spent his career playing for HCs who were just ok).
I think you're selling his accomplishments short here. Having a bottom-5/6 D four years out of five and winning 7 games each of those years is kind of impressive.

I think we're also distorted here by Brady and the seeming ease with which the Patriots made the playoffs year after year. Almost every other QB has down years where his team stinks. Rodgers' Packers went 6-9-1 just two years ago. Manning's Colts went 6-10 in his fourth year in the league (that was the infamous "PLAYOFFS?!?!" year). The year after winning his first Super Bowl, Montana's 49ers limped to 3-6 in a strike-shortened season. Elway had a 5-11 season right in the middle of his career. Favre had a 4-12 season, though that was a little later on. By Brady standards, sure, Brees doesn't measure up. By the standards of virtually every other QB ever to live, almost going .500 in seasons where you're getting zilch from the D is pretty good.

Brees vs Rodgers is interesting because Rodgers' best is clearly better than Brees - hell, Rodgers' best might be better than anybody's, including Brady's - but he's been a lot less consistent and a lot less durable.

That said, I don't think I disagree with you (or most others) here on where Brees ultimately ranks - he's not on Brady's level, and he's probably not quite on the tier below that. He's like a fringe top 10 all time guy, which is pretty damn good.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Not just “best in the game right now”; Maddux's 1994–1995 is arguably the best two-year stretch any pitcher has had in MLB history (up there with Pedro's 1999–2000 and Walter Johnson's 1912–1913).
I know this is a Pats thread but.....Pedro's 1999-200 was MUCH better than Maddux' 1994-95.

Maddux: 411.2 ip, 35-8, 1.60 era, 2.32 fip, 265 era+, 0.853 whip, 7.4 k/9, 6.24 k/bb, 15.1 bWAR
Pedro: 430.1 ip, 41-10, 1.90 era, 1.79 fip, 265 era+, 0.830 whip, 12.5 k/9, 8.65 k/bb, 21.5 bWAR

Don't misunderstand: Maddux' two year run was off the charts. But Pedro's was significantly better.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,892
Alexandria, VA
He's like a fringe top 10 all time guy, which is pretty damn good.
All time for real all time maybe he sneaks into the top 15. Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Montana, Marino, Young, Tarkenton, Unitas, Blanda, Baugh, Graham, Tittle, Herber, and then start thinking about how to compare him to Staubach, Luckman, Starr, etc.

(If you're actually including the fame/impact part then there are cases for Elway, Favre, and others as well. And if you are a peak person rather than a career person, there's the curious case of Kurt Warner.)
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,671
The George Blanda>>>>>Drew Brees argument should be a good one. Arnie Herber? That's like arguing that Dan Brouthers was a better power hitter than Barry Bonds.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
I think you're selling his accomplishments short here. Having a bottom-5/6 D four years out of five and winning 7 games each of those years is kind of impressive.

I think we're also distorted here by Brady and the seeming ease with which the Patriots made the playoffs year after year. Almost every other QB has down years where his team stinks. Rodgers' Packers went 6-9-1 just two years ago. Manning's Colts went 6-10 in his fourth year in the league (that was the infamous "PLAYOFFS?!?!" year). The year after winning his first Super Bowl, Montana's 49ers limped to 3-6 in a strike-shortened season. Elway had a 5-11 season right in the middle of his career. Favre had a 4-12 season, though that was a little later on. By Brady standards, sure, Brees doesn't measure up. By the standards of virtually every other QB ever to live, almost going .500 in seasons where you're getting zilch from the D is pretty good.

Brees vs Rodgers is interesting because Rodgers' best is clearly better than Brees - hell, Rodgers' best might be better than anybody's, including Brady's - but he's been a lot less consistent and a lot less durable.

That said, I don't think I disagree with you (or most others) here on where Brees ultimately ranks - he's not on Brady's level, and he's probably not quite on the tier below that. He's like a fringe top 10 all time guy, which is pretty damn good.
This is all basically true, and at the end we're at the same spot on Brees. With those comparisons, it's pretty telling that for many of those guys there was just one down year. Manning had just one losing season after his rookie year (and he wasn't really MANNING yet, not in 2001), same for Rodgers, same for Elway. Favre had just the one season under .500, Montana had a winning record for the last 10 years of his career, etc. What makes Brees special is that this happened 4 times in 5 years, in his prime, with a good HC. That's unusual for an all-time great.
 

Tangled Up In Red

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2004
4,538
Bernal
How would Warren Moon's numbers have looked if he had Drew Brees' career arc/path/timing?
Genuinely curious.
But Moon is in the HOF.