Advanced Stats VS. Eye Ball Test

[ChambersWI]

Advanced stats are useful tools but they are not the end all, same as combine results aren't. It's like what Greg Cossell said when asked about how impressed he was with Clowney's pro day, "Clowney is a very athletic guy, why are we surprised that he did athletic things without pads on?". The film also doesn't tell you about a player's psyche.

But you've got to take so many things into account. What kind of system did the player play in, what kind of players did he play with, what kind of players did he play against? Those are questions that do not show up in advanced stats, and in a lot of cases are overlooked on film.

All levels go together. You need the eyeball test, advanced stats, and the various combine drills to help evaluate. But in a lot of cases, if the combine or advanced stats don't match up with the eyeball test, I'd probably go with the eyeball test

 

[Zounds]

Stats are much easier to keep in sports where an individual's stats are measurable, like batting in baseball or shooting in basketball. There are so many variables in a single down of football and most of those variables are not quantified within the stats. The stats cannot tell you what is happening on the field, but they can reinforce what you are seeing on tape.

 

[So Be]

I'm likely beating a dead horse here. What I get from PFF, on an OL for example ,are how many snaps he played on pass and run blocking, how many sacks, hits, and hurries he gave up, an eyeball grade for run and pass blocking, and a rank of where that stands vs all others at his position based on the same standards being used.

That pretty much covers everything a fan has access to. Not perfect but, I do not know of anything or anyone better in overall player assessments. We all watch our team very closely, and not so with other teams to compare. We see the good and bad but, not all the player's plays in what they do every play. sometimes, this can be misleading in that a guy can be below average but, still better than most others at his position. It does not make him better, just puts things in an overall perspective compared to the rest of the NFL. JMO

 

[Zounds]

That pretty much covers everything a fan has access to. Not perfect but, I do not know of anything or anyone better in overall player assessments.

Let me ask you this: if you were a GM tasked with signing a RG, would you open up PFF and sign a RG based off of those rankings? or would you want to watch an end zone view tape of all of his snaps?

 

[roy_miami]

When the Jets extended Sanchez I wonder if that decision was based solely off the eyeball test, because if they based it just off stats it wouldn't have happened.

 

[So Be]

Let me ask you this: if you were a GM tasked with signing a RG, would you open up PFF and sign a RG based off of those rankings? or would you want to watch an end zone view tape of all of his snaps?

Obviously, a GM with a full time staff will want to take their own look. Unfortunately, fans do not have that option or, access to what they see. However, you do have agents negotiating multimillion dollar contracts for NFL players, who do use PFF in their negotiations. There are a number of testimonials confirming this.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

This will become more and more prevalent. Lots of angles and versions. On one draft forum I visit regularly, there are some formulas incorporating combine numbers to predict how successful a player will be. Looks like Barr and Mack fare well this year:

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=542878&start=0

 

[Rev Kev]

Don't you think though, rev, that hockey is a bit different than say baseball or football that way? I.e. Because of the relatively free-flowing, unstructured nature of hockey, where individual player roles/assignments are not clearly defined, it's very difficult to assign useful performance metrics and evaluate players against them? For instance, in football I can evaluate an OT's pass pro ability by measuring things like total pressures allowed, etc. because the OT's role in pass pro is very clear and the associated metric is as well. However, in hockey, the role of say a d-man as an individual is very fluid and situation dependent, almost on a second-by-second basis. As a result it's very difficult to find a good metric for his performance. Even hockey's so-called "advanced stats" (e.g. Corsi) are very dependent on team and situational play rather than the individual. I guess what I'm saying is that I largely agree with Burke when it comes to hockey, but less so when it comes to football or baseball...

I think he is stressing the eyes -> I agree with your point about the fluididty of the skaters

 

[Zounds]

Obviously, a GM with a full time staff will want to take their own look. Unfortunately, fans do not have that option or, access to what they see. However, you do have agents negotiating multimillion dollar contracts for NFL players, who do use PFF in their negotiations. There are a number of testimonials confirming this.

So you use PFF out of the convenience it provides, rather than their diligence. I don't really care what agents use, they would cite Armando if it could get them leverage, but they way some people tout the PFF grades in this forum as an absolute is beyond me.

 

[Rev Kev]

I agree about his trade history, although the Kessel trade takes the shine off a lot of his successes. Also, his drafting (at least with my Canucks) was pretty bad. He picked 5 good players (like the sisters, Kesler, etc>) and 100 total busts. But maybe his new protege (Treliving) will be better?

He put Treviliving in place so that he can make the picks and Treliving can do the day to day grind - LOL

 

[where's th'fish]

You need both, you can't only use advanced statistics, especially in football. Stats are just numbers, and the numbers -and this is the key step everyone who doesn't understand advanced stats omits- need to be interpreted before they give any meaningful information.

On the other hand, advanced stats can help by providing objective evidence to balance out prejudice and preconceptions. For example, take one of those miserably bad OCs out there. Even the worst of those know more football than you do, so there's no way you could talk them conceptually out of their lousy gameplans, but if they paid attention to advanced statistics, they could see that they're not working.

In other words, everyone always think they're right, so if you stick to your eyeballs, there's no more headway to make. Each to his own stubbornness. Stats can help locate our blind spots and polish them. It's win-win.

It's wrong to feel threatened by stats. They're a tool, not HAL 9000. They're not here to take the place of the human brain in football, but to help it.

 

[Rev Kev]

Jets made a mistake with Gholsten off what one or two series against Jake Long??? I guess even the eyes can deceive

 

[Zounds]

This will become more and more prevalent. Lots of angles and versions. On one draft forum I visit regularly, there are some formulas incorporating combine numbers to predict how successful a player will be. Looks like Barr and Mack fare well this year:

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=542878&start=0

The formula that guys uses incorporates a few redundant variables speed 10, speed 40, and average speed are all highly correlated and cannot be used in the same model. He could stand to read the chapter on multicollinearity in his statistics 101 textbook. Too many people are wowed by numbers and statistical models without even a simple F test to verify the hypothesis. His is bunk just by looking at it.

 

[Rev Kev]

You need both, you can't only use advanced statistics, especially in football. Stats are just numbers, and the numbers -and this is the key step everyone who doesn't understand advanced stats omits- need to be interpreted before they give any meaningful information.

On the other hand, advanced stats can help by providing objective evidence to balance out prejudice and preconceptions. For example, take one of those miserably bad OCs out there. Even the worst of those know more football than you do, so there's no way you could talk them conceptually out of their lousy gameplans, but if they paid attention to advanced statistics, they could see that they're not working.

In other words, everyone always think they're right, so if you stick to your eyeballs, there's no more headway to make. Each to his own stubbornness. Stats can help locate our blind spots and polish them. It's win-win.

It's wrong to feel threatened by stats. They're a tool, not HAL 9000. They're not here to take the place of the human brain in football, but to help it.

Yes I see I believe (no pun) but Burke is also saying he can't find the metric or he would buy it - to gain the competitive advantage

in PFF talk they watch a player and grade from there (is Burke not saying) the advanced stat is to be created before the eyeball test does it not? do i make sense?

 

[So Be]

So you use PFF out of the convenience it provides, rather than their diligence. I don't really care what agents use, they would cite Armando if it could get them leverage, but they way some people tout the PFF grades in this forum as an absolute is beyond me.

Both. In no way can I take over 10 hours a week to look at our players. For the year, that's 4 full 40 hour weeks. PFF grades are not absolute but, I know of no other source which can come close in a combo of eyeball and stats.

IMO, it makes no sense to rip them when the vast majority doing so have never seen what they offer. What I post here is only a very small portion of what they provide.