Metrics are for.... | Page 5 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Metrics are for....

Most of the stat threads on Finheaven are superficial, incorrectly applied, deal with a small sample size, or excludes some pertinent data. Human behavior is the hardest thing to predict, especially when you are predicting how 11 players will simultaneous play during a 5 second interval.

The problem with football stats is that they measure the past, but aren't a good tool to predict the future in a sport with so many variables - coaching, individual matchups, weather, injuries, ect. Many people fall into the trap of taking averages in a game of extremes, which will end up providing very misleading "gotcha" stats. Tape always trumps the stats imo, and while the stats can validate the tape, many people here want the game to validate the stats.
 
People that don't know football.. Tired of hearing about all these crazy statistic. Numbers can lie and never tell the whole picture, tape does. The eye in the sky doesn't lie.

Tape might not tell you how that player might grow in a few years, but measueables and statistics might. Measueables and statistics might not give you an accurate idea how good a player he is, but tape might.....Use both, and you will accrately know a great deal of what type of player you have.
 
Coaching and scheme matters a lot. Go back and look at the year by year splits on efficiency statistics for QBs like Rich Gannon and Matt Hasselbeck, for instance. Look at the complete metamorphosis that Rich Gannon underwent when Jon Gruden got his hands on him. Look at what happened to Matt Hasselbeck in Seattle after Holmgren left the building. Once Greg Knapp got his hands on Hasselbeck, his efficiency numbers fell off the face of the earth.

Nick Foles has done well in Philadelphia and deserves credit for his play, but do you really think he would be enjoying such incredible efficiency if we swapped him into the Dolphins offense under Mike Sherman?

I can tell you he wouldn't have a 9.0 yards per attempt statistic or a top three all time passer rating in an offense in which he's being asked to throw quick flare-outs to Dion Sims and tight comebacks/outs to Brian Hartline and Mike Wallace with a pocket that's usually crumbling in his face. Oh, and if the first read ain't wide open and they're covering McCoy, just take off if you got some room. And folks, that isn't a criticism of Foles or some attempt to discredit him. That's a credit to GREAT coaching and a QB who understands what's asked of him -- and can do it well.

Incidentally, this is why I am very skeptical of the Lazor hire. From what I'm hearing, Lazor is going to keep a lot of the stuff from Mike Sherman's system in place, or at least it sounds that way to me. That's not good.

We should have fired Joe Philbin if that's what it would take to bring in someone who actually understands how to get production out of his players.

I agree on Lazor way too little history to predict one way or another with him but Im willing to see. I have seen enough with Philbin. beginning of season I felt he was safe and deserved another year but to not even be in games versus mediocre teams with playoffs online is almost unheard of
 
I have a bit of a connection (acquaintance is an ex-pro QB who knows Belichick well!) and I can tell you that Bellichick DOES use them. He certainly doesn't use them the way the way Shou/Gravity does but they do have their place. Coaches look for matchup advantages and statistical tendencies and metrics have a lot to do with creating them.
The way I use them is the way the folks referenced in the following article use them:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1206508/index.htm

If I were coaching an NFL team, however, I'd use them in that way as well as in the way it was said above that Belichick uses them.
 
A Mike Mayock sentence goes something like this: Tape, tape, tape, kid, kid, tape, kid, tape, tape kid, tape, tape.

And that's all you need to know.

Mayock has been a boon to the type who somehow think it's a revelation to look at tape. As in, look at me, I'm watching the same thing as everyone else.

Perhaps we should throw a parade.

Fixation on tape is laughably simplistic. The high error rate in scouting is largely due to obsession with tape while ignoring the peripheral variables and how to weigh them. But I concede it won't change. Guys in this era are brainwashed to rely on tape, just like college football fans are now paralyzed to evaluate a team minus strength of schedule.

Two horses can be dead even at the top of the stretch. But how they got there and their likelihood to win the race, or subsequent races, can be vastly different. If you know the pedigree and the surrounding details, you understand that. It's not a surprise when there's a 7 length gap at the wire. But the goof with the binoculars and no background in the sport is cheering for the red saddlecloth and little else. If he sees Ryan Tannehill and Johnny Manziel looking roughly the same in a Texas A&M uniform late in their careers, he concludes they are parallel and their pro potential is roughly the same, if not advantage Tannehill. Heck, draft each one of them in the 8 spot. Disregard that one guy has been a special playmaker all his life while the other has been a perennial tease.

Tape lies all the time when conventional wisdom is the principal ammo of the beholder.

Bar stool types are shocked to be challenged. That's verified daily here. They are accustomed to screaming this guy sucks and that guy sucks and awaiting peer approval. That's how a modern day Steve Deberg-like Alex Smith and his lifetime pathetic 6.6 yards per attempt, just good enough to get you beat, is actually preferred above Colin Kaepernick and his 7.9 lifetime number and adjusted 8.1. It's rare for the second number to be superior to the first but the happy adjusters are wonderfully oblivious. Something in their system screamed suck so they stick with stuck. They don't even understand the criteria that places the second number above the first but none of that matters as long as the guy in the adjoining stool is equally bewildered.

futurescout is talented but he makes basic mistakes. Like yesterday when he announced that Cameron Wake has many top years left since he was inactive in his early 20s. That's happy adjuster caliber. Walrus properly scolded. Now the onslaught on numbers. I remember when I was new to Las Vegas and bet strictly on line of scrimmage mismatches. I scoffed at the eccentric nerds who were babbling about situational bias, and some vague concept of value. I threw away my stubbornness, studied what I'd previously dismissed, and prospered. Let it happen to you.

In the meantime, make sure you never speculate. :lol:

I think John Abraham is still pretty good... 11.5 sacks and 4 forced fumbles at 35. Do I think Wake has 3 years of Pro-Bowl play left? Absolutely.
 
Then again, there are people who know football, and people that think it's worth investing in
a veteran running back that's underachieved his whole career, until he came into his contract year
and pay that back big money in the FA market.

I suggested signing Knowshon Moreno to a 1 year deal because he is the top running back available this off-season. 2015's draft class includes: Todd Gurley, Melvin Gordon, Mike Davis, TJ Yeldon, and Duke Johnson. I was simply suggesting signing Moreno to a 1 year deal to be a bridge starter until we draft someone in 2015. Please explain to me how a 1 year deal is big money in the FA market......
 
And when someone is no one but a fan on a message board (myself included), he ought to recognize his potential for bias with regard to what he believes he's seeing on his television screen, and use objective data to confirm or disconfirm the conclusions he makes via that medium.

I played Division 1 football, and after I graduate with my bachelors degree I have an internship set up with the Kansas City Chiefs Scouting Department. I am not just a fan on a message board.
 
I think John Abraham is still pretty good... 11.5 sacks and 4 forced fumbles at 35. Do I think Wake has 3 years of Pro-Bowl play left? Absolutely.
This is precisely why you need objective information based on an adequate sample size. If John Abraham is an exception to the rule in that regard (which I strongly suspect he is), then players of his age are unlikely to perform in the way he did, Wake included.

Does that mean Wake definitely won't play that way? Of course not. But when we're talking about predicting the future, because we don't have a crystal ball, we ought to speak in terms of probability and not in terms of certainty anyway.

The only way to assess Wake's probability of playing the way Abraham did is to gather an adequate sample of similar players and look at them all, rather than just one of them.

---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------

I played Division 1 football, and after I graduate with my bachelors degree I have an internship set up with the Kansas City Chiefs Scouting Department. I am not just a fan on a message board.
How do we know when you're wrong?
 
This is precisely why you need objective information based on an adequate sample size. If John Abraham is an exception to the rule in that regard (which I strongly suspect he is), then players of his age are unlikely to perform in the way he did, Wake included.

Does that mean Wake definitely won't play that way? Of course not. But when we're talking about predicting the future, because we don't have a crystal ball, we ought to speak in terms of probability and not in terms of certainty anyway.

The only way to assess Wake's probability of playing the way Abraham did is to gather an adequate sample of similar players and look at them all, rather than just one of them.

---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------

How do we know when you're wrong?

A big part of playing long into your career is work ethic, mixed with incredible genetics. I think no one is disputing that Wake has both. I should have clarified that instead of just saying "because he didn't play early in his career blah blah" That's my bad. Based on his work ethic, and the fact he has had a clean bill of health in the NFL, (missed only 3 games since 2010) I believe he has at least 2-3 more years of Pro-Bowl Caliber play. Will he be as good in 2016 as he was this year? No probably not, but he can be a productive pass rusher.
 
I suggested signing Knowshon Moreno to a 1 year deal because he is the top running back available this off-season. 2015's draft class includes: Todd Gurley, Melvin Gordon, Mike Davis, TJ Yeldon, and Duke Johnson. I was simply suggesting signing Moreno to a 1 year deal to be a bridge starter until we draft someone in 2015. Please explain to me how a 1 year deal is big money in the FA market......

can you explain why the "top running back available" would sign an only one year deal
 
can you explain why the "top running back available" would sign an only one year deal

that's why you have to offer him 3-5 Million for the deal. He might find the market is low on him, and bet on himself for one, like top free agents like Michael Bennett, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, and Aqib Talib did last year.
 
I played Division 1 football, and after I graduate with my bachelors degree I have an internship set up with the Kansas City Chiefs Scouting Department. I am not just a fan on a message board.
I'm interested in your answer to the following question, if you're interested in answering it:

How do we know when you're wrong?
 
Back
Top Bottom