The Most Important Passing Stat - 2nd Down Yardage?

[Jpan85]

18 minutes ago, Noeller said:

As I said, all I'm saying is "I'd listen to a case for" that theory.....it would make sense......nerds like to think they understand sports, but unless you've been there, in the room, on the bench/sideline.....you don't really "get it". I would guess that most advance stats nerds are guys who suck at sports but want to be cool and say they're involved in sports, so here's there way to put nerd skills to use. 

Again, just saying I'd listen to the case for that......

Sorry to say but the stats guys have taken over baseball and have been successful. 1/3 of the GMs have an Ivy League education.

[Jpan85]

I think the real step forward in football statics will come when they are properly track different things spatially instead of purely numerically. There is something to be said about being able to visualize a player capabilities.

[blue_gold_84]

29 minutes ago, Noeller said:

As I said, all I'm saying is "I'd listen to a case for" that theory.....it would make sense......nerds like to think they understand sports, but unless you've been there, in the room, on the bench/sideline.....you don't really "get it". I would guess that most advance stats nerds are guys who suck at sports but want to be cool and say they're involved in sports, so here's there way to put nerd skills to use. 

Again, just saying I'd listen to the case for that......

Theo Epstein never played professional baseball but has been a very successful GM in MLB. He helped end the Red Sox championship drought in 2004 and did the same with the Chicago Cubs last year.

Stan Bowman never played professional hockey but his success as a GM in the NHL has been unparalleled in the last decade or so. The Blackhawks were the first NHL team to put analytics to work in hockey and the results speak volumes. Since then, many other NHL teams have copied that strategy and the league itself has adopted analytics/advanced statistics as an important aspect of the game.

You don't have to play the sport to "get it," anyway. I can't say I understand your line of thought.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, Jpan85 said:

Sorry to say but the stats guys have taken over baseball and have been successful. 1/3 of the GMs have an Ivy League education.

The reason baseball works is because it's a series of one vs. one battles. Works less well in team play.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Theo Epstein never played professional baseball but has been a very successful GM in MLB. He helped end the Red Sox championship drought in 2004 and did the same with the Chicago Cubs last year.

Stan Bowman never played professional hockey but his success as a GM in the NHL has been unparalleled in the last decade or so. The Blackhawks were the first NHL team to put analytics to work in hockey and the results speak volumes. Since then, many other NHL teams have copied that strategy and the league itself has adopted analytics/advanced statistics as an important aspect of the game.

You don't have to play the sport to "get it," anyway. I can't say I understand your line of thought.

But the hawks use it mostly as a scouting tool, and they use stuff that the fans and bloggers don't track. Plus in hockey it also has some discrepancy between stats and reality. Best example is Kris Russell. Guy has bad fancy stats yet still a good player and it drives stats nerds bonkers

[Rich]

The analytics have their place, but shouldn't solely be relied on.  They are a complimentary piece to help give you a complete picture  

When you see the outliers (high or low) it can give you direction to take a closer look at a guy as to why the stats are coming out that way.   It can also be used to validate what you are seeing visually.  

With how competitive professional sports are in trying to gain any advantage over your competition, dismissing them completely is just as dumb as solely relying on them. 

They are a tool, and like any tool, success willl depend on if you know how to use it properly. 

[wbbfan]

41 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

The reason baseball works is because it's a series of one vs. one battles. Works less well in team play.

Basketball has actually made nearly as extensive a use of analytics as baseball has. And the NFL was using them before it was common in baseball. It hasnt developed as far in the NFL, but they break down 1000s of categories of raw stats. WR completion percentages, QB passing % zones, all kinds of em. Its a nerd world we live in. 

[blue_gold_84]

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

But the hawks use it mostly as a scouting tool, and they use stuff that the fans and bloggers don't track. Plus in hockey it also has some discrepancy between stats and reality. Best example is Kris Russell. Guy has bad fancy stats yet still a good player and it drives stats nerds bonkers

In a draft and develop model, it's an important tool. Of course there are discrepancies; nothing is perfect.

[17to85]

But the point is that it's mostly a scouting tool, whether it's self scouting or scouting players on other teams. I've said this plenty in lots of places, but any kind of statistics are only as valuable as the people interpreting them. Knowing how to use the numbers is far more important than actually having the numbers. 

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

But the point is that it's mostly a scouting tool, whether it's self scouting or scouting players on other teams. I've said this plenty in lots of places, but any kind of statistics are only as valuable as the people interpreting them. Knowing how to use the numbers is far more important than actually having the numbers. 

I'd think using statistical analysis would be helpful in determining play selection on the O side of the ball. 

[SPuDS]

39 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I'd think using statistical analysis would be helpful in determining play selection on the O side of the ball. 

hypothetically yes.. if the defensive co-ordinator on the other side of the ball doesn't deviate much from their play calling..  if they are more cavalier with how they run a defense, it may backfire.. 

 

it would also aid in upping the percentages of plays working if all the variables are factored in, for sure but thats also its Achilles heel, so many variables in play on every down..

 

 

[blue_gold_84]

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

But the point is that it's mostly a scouting tool, whether it's self scouting or scouting players on other teams. I've said this plenty in lots of places, but any kind of statistics are only as valuable as the people interpreting them. Knowing how to use the numbers is far more important than actually having the numbers. 

That goes without saying, though. Obviously, the individuals calling the shots have to understand how analytics work in order to apply them to their operation. I mean, that same logic can be applied to anything in sports. Coaches have to know how to use players, players have to know how to use plays, etc.

My point is this: analytics have value and the results we've seen in recent years across sports demonstrate that consistently.

[17to85]

everyone is looking for an edge, I still don't know that analytics are as useful in sports like football and hockey as people like to believe. 

[Floyd]

23 hours ago, 17to85 said:

But the hawks use it mostly as a scouting tool, and they use stuff that the fans and bloggers don't track. Plus in hockey it also has some discrepancy between stats and reality. Best example is Kris Russell. Guy has bad fancy stats yet still a good player and it drives stats nerds bonkers

Kriss Russell is Mark Stuart four years ago...  he's not a good player.  He's a player everyone wants to be good.

[Mr Dee]

36 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

everyone is looking for an edge, I still don't know that analytics are as useful in sports like football and hockey as people like to believe. 

They are not.

Co-ordinators are far more interested in stopping the plays that have resulted in those fancy stats. They don't care if the QB has tremendous stats, they just want to exploit witnesses in the offence that will destroy those stats. The same thing on the other side of the ball. 

Good stats come from being a good team and being successful. But it is much more of a team environment that leads to all stats.  

Statistics are the result of what happens on the field/playing surface and whether that TEAM is good or bad. It's not the other way around.

[Arnold_Palmer]

Russell Wilson has a better career QB rating then Tom fricking Brady. Do you think anyone in their right mind would actually take Wilson over Brady?

[rebusrankin]

28 minutes ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

Russell Wilson has a better career QB rating then Tom fricking Brady. Do you think anyone in their right mind would actually take Wilson over Brady?

Russell Wilson's Mom.

[bearpants]

14 hours ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

Russell Wilson has a better career QB rating then Tom fricking Brady. Do you think anyone in their right mind would actually take Wilson over Brady?

Depends.... is it a structured system with excellent route running and YAC receivers where the QB gets almost unlimited time to throw and has reliable pass-catching RBs?... if so, than I certainly want Brady... if the system relies on some improv and doesn't have nearly as reliable weapons or O-line, I'd prefer Wilson....

Which actually furthers your point that stats can only tell a small part of the story...  

[blue_gold_84]

16 hours ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

Russell Wilson has a better career QB rating then Tom fricking Brady. Do you think anyone in their right mind would actually take Wilson over Brady?

Russell Wilson's sample size is also considerably smaller.

[blue_gold_84]

17 hours ago, 17to85 said:

everyone is looking for an edge, I still don't know that analytics are as useful in sports like football and hockey as people like to believe. 

Analytics have proven useful, at least in the NHL, when the majority of teams use them and the league itself gets behind it.

[TheAardvark]

Not sure how much analytics can be effectively used in football, sample sizes and variables are much different than in baseball or hockey.  The reduced number of times teams face each other, the large variability in the personnel on either side of the ball, number of players involved in each play... trying to figure out how much of each play a certain player was responsible for... breaking down the film and assessing the play of any one player seems like an impossible task, even with the best algorithms. 

 

Can they be used to assess coaches and systems?  That I can see... but not for specific players.  We'll have to rely on stats for that

Edited May 21, 2017 by TheAardvark