FoxxyBrown1111 said:
BTW I really love that pick since Easteregg last week made me so much annoyed that I almost vomited on his screen picture. One of his colossal blunders: He said SF is last in pass offense. True if looking at total yards. So it seemed it has some merit... And then he said it´s b/c Kaep can´t play a pro offense, that he is exposed after one season. Well this idiot didn´t see that SF was 12th (now 10th) in pass efficiency (Y/PP); that the O Harbaugh runs isn´t designed to get pass wacky, but efficient; that teams who are good run down the clock... By his reasoning (going with total yards) Bob Griese and Paul Warfield must have been some of the worst in the 70s.
If you really want evidence that total yards doesn’t mean much, consider that until this past week, Houston was no. 1 in the NFL in defense (fewest yards allowed), and just a couple of weeks before, they were 5th in offense. In both of those rankings they were ahead of Seattle! Yet 26th in points allowed (that must be one of the biggest discrepancies of its kind in league history), and 30th in points scored.
It´s disgusting that such guys get paid good money for poisoning football fans with wrong "facts", and yet some great writers in this thread have no job in that business (for example you, Alpe, Merckx) ...
It’s funny. Football is a far more complex game than baseball, but while I feel I have a good understanding of it, in a statistical sense, I’m way behind in baseball. Sabermetrics is really becoming complex, there are guys writing articles in which they show “heat maps” of pitches, with, e.g., the batter’s slugging percentage (or some much further out saber stat) at every point in and outside the strike zone. And analyzing to the nth degree the batter’s body movements when he swings or doesn’t swing.
Not to mention all the different definitions of player value, or WAR. The game has evolved to the point where every move every batter and every fielder makes is taped and analyzed, to determine its relative value. To evaluate a SS, for example, you have to know what he did on balls hit at various distances from him, regardless of whether he touched the ball or not. The simple distinction between hits and errors has long been confined to the dustbin. Likewise, catchers are now being credited for “framing” and “sequencing” pitches, and the whole issue of how much a pitcher is responsible for is being called into question. Plus ballpark factors, and on and on and on. I’m a scientist, and I have trouble following some of this stuff, though of course I don’t spend as much time on it as the saber geeks do.
Ironically, the reason football doesn’t have sabermetrics, yet, is mostly because it’s too complex to do. Every player’s performance is related to everyone else’s, whereas in baseball, so much of it is just one on one, pitcher vs. batter. Ideally, we would like to have a precise measure of, say, a QB’s value that took into account his OL and his WRs, but it’s still too difficult to do. So is Luck, with his bottom quarter QB efficiency rating, really one of the best QBs in the league, or not? It’s pretty subjective.
Speaking of Luck, saw an article ranking the four young Turks—Luck, RGIII, Wilson and Kaep—for long-term potential. Not what they're doing now, but how they will turn out in the long run. Foxxy and Amster won’t agree, and neither will fans in the NW. Had Luck first, Kaep second, Wilson 3d, RG dead last…
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram