She is trying to look at Football the way analytics people look at Baseball and basketball.
The problem is football is much less stats driven and just does not lend itself to that kind of analysis.
Signing a player like Flowers who struggled as a LT but did much better when he moved inside(especially as the season went on)is betting on him continuing to improve.It is based on actually scouting the player and seeing the potential for that improvement.
Analytics can be used in baseball and basketball effectively to the point where you do not need to watch the players play or to watch the sport at all.An AI could be built that could scout baseball/basketball pretty successfully because stats really do tell the tale in those sports.
Football is different.I think modern statisitical analysis/game theory etc...can be used to some degree in Football but never as effectively as baseball and hoops.
I'm in agreement, the typical stats for football are less informative than the stats in baseball. But as these things evolve so do the stats that track them. In years past a RB would have yards per carry ... but that is as much a reflection on the ability of the OL to open lanes and the deep threat of the passing game and the QB's ability in the short game to get the defense into pass-defense mode as it had to do with the RB's ability to earn yards. YPA isn't a useless stat, but it doesn't tell enough. Totally agree.
Today in the passing game we are seeing the Yard Per Attempt (YPA) used more frequently, and that's a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, stats don't take into account running yards into YPA, and as QB's get sacked or run as part of the RPO, those stats need to be factored into the YPA number as well, even if the QB decides not to attempt a pass, it was a potential passing situation. As it is now, the running QB's double-dip in the stats department not taking a 0 in the YPA if they decide to run, then getting their running yardage tacked on as if it is some sort of superlative. If their YPA is 7.5, then their RPA needs to be 7.5 to just average out. Most of the time, it isn't, but it is double-counted as some sort of wonderous thing ... when in fact it is not always a good football play. Similarly, we need to fix the INT metric, because as it exists now, it's simply not fair.
For instance, when a ground ball hits the 2nd baseman in the glove, and it bounces into right field, that's considered an error, as the fielder should have made the play. But if a QB bounces a ball off the hands/chest of a WR, and it bounces up into the air for an INT, we count that as the worst possible result for the QB ... which is ludicrous. We need to start assigning errors like they do in baseball. When it hits the WR's 2 hands or an area where both hands could reach it, that's clearly an INT on the WR. When the ball is uncatchable by the WR, then that's clearly an INT on the QB. We're never going to know for sure when the WR runs the wrong route, so keep giving those to the QB and just make due best we can. But another huge hole is that QB fumbles are not counted against him ... WTF?!?!!?? If a QB fumbles the ball, that should be counted against the QB exactly the same as an INT is counted against him. Who the hell cares if it was a running play or a passing play, the QB's poor play created a give-away! That's a bad play by the QB, and his rating needs to reflect that!
So yeah, our stats in football aren't as evolved as they are in baseball ... but those are just 3 easy ways to improve some of those stats. For OL, it would be more painstaking, but win % 1v1, pressures allowed % 1v1, stunt/handoff win %, etc., but yeah, we could much better quantify these things. Right now the far more general and less informative info are things like Sacks Allowed, Pressures Allowed, and Average Yards Per Carry over either hole the OL controls. Not useless, but they could be more effective. Quantifying things like chemistry would be harder to do, but they would show in the other stats I'd imagine.
Long story short, Ereck Flowers has good potential, but has never really lived up to it. He was ill-suited for LT, and I said that coming out, but he can definitely be a RT if he gets his mind focused and works on his game. As a LG or RG, maybe, but last season was merely good, and we're paying a lot for one year of merely good which is the best of what he's shown. These DT's in the AFC East are no joke, so it remains to be seen whether he can duplicate this, or whether it was a one year FA aberration. My fingers are crossed.
Fins up.
