Stats back Justin Fields as QB best suited for Steelers’ offense under Arthur Smith

It seems moving on from Kenny Pickett and Mason Rudolph could be best for their new offensive coordinator…

In case you haven’t heard, the Steelers have a big question at quarterback that needs to be answered in the next two months. Kenny Pickett is the only quarterback currently under contract, but he was outplayed by third-string Mason Rudolph last year. While re-signing impending free agent Mason Rudolph could be the Steelers’ answer to the quarterback conundrum, it’s still debatable if that’s the best option. With that, national media has pegged just about every potentially available quarterback as a potential target for the Steelers this offseason.

Not every quarterback fits every offense, and the Steelers hired Arthur Smith to run the offense going forward. How might Pickett, Rudolph, and other quarterbacks potentially on the Steelers’ radar would fit into this new style offense?

Arthur Smith’s offensive tendencies

New OC Arthur Smith prefers a distinct style of offense based on his two years as the Titan offensive coordinator and three years as the Falcon head coach, and that style favors some quarterbacks over others. Smith likes to run the ball and utilize two concepts the Steelers used very little last year with Rudolph and Pickett — a quarterback lined up under center and play action passes.

Per Pro Football Reference, which will be used for all stats referenced throughout this article, Smith’s final product with the Tennessee Titans used the quarterback under center on 34% of the passing snaps while using play action (including shotgun play action) on 32% of the passing snaps.

Similarly, the final version of his offense in Atlanta used under-center formations on 32% of passing plays and play action on 25%. This is a monumental shift from the 2023 Steelers, who used these concepts on 11.5% and 13% of plays, respectively.

Comparison of experience in an Arthur Smith-type offense

Now, let’s look at the experience of six of the Steelers’ potential options at quarterback in the coming season to see who might be the most comfortable with the style of offense Smith will likely execute with the Steelers.

Here’s a look at quarterback under-center passing snaps versus play action from 2023 (including shotgun play action) as a percentage of each quarterback’s total pass plays. Numbers are rounded to the nearest percentage point.

A comparison of performance in Arthur Smith’s offense

Being comfortable in an offensive scheme due to experience isn’t the same as executing it well. Here, we list career passer ratings under center versus out of shotgun and rank the quarterbacks by the difference between those two passer ratings.

Next is a look at career play-action passer rating versus non-play-action passer rating, again, ranked by the difference between the two.

Best fit for the Steelers at quarterback

Mason Rudolph ranks last in relative experience under center, passer rating under center, and passer rating with play action, while ranking second to last in relative experience with play action. He does rate decently in terms of his NFL passer rating out of shotgun (91) and non-play action plays (88), but those concepts will likely be utilized less frequently in Smith’s offense. That likely won’t be good enough to make up for his low rankings in the concepts the quarterback will need to do more of in 2024, including plays under center.

With that, there’s not much reason to have Rudolph back in 2024 other than to hope that with more experience he would improve in the two very important facets of the new offense. Having quarterbacked in a shotgun air-raid offense in college, he had no background in playing this style of offense. In his six years in the NFL and hasn’t been exposed to it much at all. At this stage of his career, can the leopard change its spots?

Notably, Kenny Pickett was right down there with Rudolph in the bottom two of every category. They both had the same coaches, and that certainly could be a big part of the problem. With fewer years experience, however, it could be more likely that Pickett can adapt. Regardless, keep in mind Ben Roethlisberger’s dislike for under-center play action passes because they force the quarterback to take his eyes off the defense while faking the handoff. That allows less time for analyzing and forces quicker processing of the routes and coverage. Processing is arguably the biggest weakness of Pickett’s game, and faster processing will be needed to execute Smith’s heavy use of play action. Can that be fixed?

Russell Wilson and Kirk Cousins both rank high in all of these situational passer ratings. You don’t get to be an NFL starting quarterback for a decade otherwise. While their abilities would be head and shoulders above the rest of the potentially available quarterbacks, their age will assuredly lead to declining skills which could negate anything an offensive scheme would provide. It’s hard to envision a sustainable bump in performance with them, and the Steelers are extremely unlikely to be a Super Bowl contender before their skills diminish.

Baker Mayfield ranks right in the middle of our six quarterbacks in terms of scheme fit. Bouncing through four franchises in six years, Mayfield had never ranked above No. 18 in passer rating until the 2023 season. He will be 29 at the beginning of the season, meaning he has a longer shelf life than Wilson or Cousins. There’s a reason to think he would improve in this offense, but he hasn’t displayed the higher functioning of Wilson, Cousins or current Bears quarterback, Justin Fields, either. Did Mayfield turn the corner in 2023 and is headed up, or was it just an aberration? Time will tell.

That leads us to Justin Fields. When I started cracking into the stats for this article, I had zero expectation that it would land on Fields. His turnovers are off the charts compared to the other five quarterbacks in the conversation. Fields has 30 INTs in his 40 starts, but he has been remarkably better when playing under center. In Arthur Smith’s offense, he would be asked to do that about twice as often as he has in years prior. A passer rating of 110 under center should stand out, but may not mean much to you; 12 TDs with only 1 INT under center probably gets your attention though. His 103 rating on play action is founded on 12 TDs with 2 INTs.

While these plays are still a minority being used only about 30% of the time under Smith, when executed well, they can heavily impact the overall success of the quarterback. For example, veteran Ryan Tannehill was Smith’s quarterback in Tennessee. He came to the Titans with turnover problems similar to Fields, having thrown 75 interceptions over 88 games. In Smith’s offense, however, Tannehill minimized those turnovers with just 13 interceptions in 26 games. Before his stint with the Titans, Tannehill’s career-best overall passer rating was 92.7 with the Miami Dolphins. Across two seasons in Arthur Smith’s offense, it was 110.6. The passer rating for Fields, meanwhile, has trended up each of his three years to an 86.3 in the 2023 season. A potential bump like Tannehill displayed in passing efficiency makes Fields highly attractive.

Another issue for Fields — he’s fumbled the ball 38 times over his 40 NFL starts, having lost 11 of them. Quarterback fumbles are often the result of pass rush pressures and sacks, so let’s look at the effect of Smith’s offense on Tannehill to project the potential impact for Fields. Over his three seasons, Fields has taken 3.4 sacks per game in his time with the Chicago Bears. Tannehill, meanwhile, had played six seasons in Miami before playing for Smith, taking 2.8 sacks per game as a Dolphin.

Under Smith, Tannehill was sacked 2.1 times per game. Similarly, Tannehill saw a decrease in his fumble rate, averaging 0.65 fumbles per game with the Dolphins before dropping that average to just 0.46 per game under Smith. While Fields’ fumble rate of 0.95 per game is much higher than Tannehill’s in Miami, a sizeable reduction in sacks and fumbles is reasonable to predict in Smith’s offense based on his history with Tannehill.

Of course, stat mining has its limitations and shouldn’t be the sole basis for making a roster decision at quarterback; the Arthur Smith effect would theoretically apply to all talented quarterbacks. Still, there’s limited upside with Cousins and Wilson due to an already high base and a short window. Meanwhile, Pickett and Rudolph have shown little promise that they can execute what will likely be asked of them. Mayfield comes with his middle-of-the-road career numbers that, even when good, don’t tease an exciting upside.

Based on situational stats, the best bet to make a meaningful, long-term impact at the quarterback position under Arthur Smith is Justin Fields.

How would you feel if the Steelers sent their second-round pick (No. 51) to the Bears to acquire QB Justin Fields? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section!