Awww sour grapes are cute. No luck. Just the truth..in detail. You say bad process i see amazing outcome. Your process is the one that failed. Maybe you need to study more advanced metrics
I'm saying that QB's as inaccurate as Allen was almost never become significantly more accurate like he did, which is a fact. Again you're mixing up process and outcome. You had a bad process and got a lucky outcome with Allen. If you employed that same process for 100 different QB prospects you'd be wrong the vast majority of the time. My process works more often than yours does. I don't let outliers change my process. Randomness and variance are things. I'll use an example I used in another post. You have 2 lotto tickets, A and B. Both pay $1 million if you win. Ticket A wins 5% of the time and ticket B wins 40% of the time. There are times you'll win with ticket A and not ticket B. That doesn't mean it's ever smart to choose ticket A.
You were using college completion % as an end all be all, and apparently discounting rushing effectiveness and intangibles, which is why you were wrong. Was Rosen the guy you wanted? .
you know nothing of my process,track record or the like. All you know is i was 100% right in DETAIL w full explanation.. you hid behind numbers & college stats & you lost. YOU were 100% wrong. And i mean..a franchise QB?? Its a collossal WHIFF.It was ALL THERE on Tape!!! Ahh yes..but MY process that you know nothing about sucks. go drown in your numbers nerd.This is football
I understand, and I hear what you're saying. Some people go too far with them. Personally, I always pay more attention to what I see with my eyes, than I do stats, but they can help verify what I think I see, or make me look again to see what I might have missed. That's why I think they have their place.
No, I thought Baker was the best QB prospect in that draft. A couple more !'s and ?'s and you might have me convinced. I wasn't even active on this board during that draft, but keep letting your head blow up acting like I don't know about your process when you weren't even privy to mine at the time.
PFF is absolute football poison and tries to analyze football the same way you would analyze baseball. It takes absolute no context into account and is completely subjective to the person giving out the ratings. It's easy to use analytics with a sport like baseball because if a guy hits the ball to one side 80% of the time, well you play the chances that he's going to continue doing that. Same goes with basketball. If you hit 3's at 40% and 2's at 45% well then you should take more three's because the percentage different is negligible over an entire game given you're getting more points for a three obviously. Not to mention a lot of their "football analyst" positions are manned by entry level college kids working slightly above minimum wage as their first job. That's not to say some of them can't be absolute football junkies who might be good at it but these aren't exactly well attributed football analysts. Take it with a grain of salt guys. There's a lot more to football and a football play than meets the eyes which can be analyzed in a vacuum especially considering the "analyst" has no insight into what is called, what happens pre-snap, doesn't factor in how the defense reacts and such. For what it's worth @KurtTheJetsFan Coastal Carolina was pretty damn good last year and I'd hardly say they were an FCS opponent. I watched them a lot because they were a cover machine. And I don't want Wilson at all.
It's harder to apply statistics to football than baseball, basketball etc but PFF comes the closest to doing so correctly. It actually accounts for context far more than any other analytics site, that's kind of what they're known for. They account for most of the factors that aren't considered by traditional stats. Field position, score, down and distance, ball location, strengths of defense/offense of opposition etc. Here's a snippet of their methodology: "PFF grades every NFL player on every play on a scale of -2 to +2 using half point increments. The grades are based on context and performance. A four-yard run that gains a first down after two broken tackles will receive a better grade than a four-yard run on 3rd & 5, where the ball carrier does nothing more than expected. A quarterback who makes a good pass that a receiver tips into the arms of a defender will not negatively affect the quarterback's grade on that play, despite the overall negative result for the team." To say they don't consider context couldn't be further from the truth. Considering context is mainly what they're known for. The fact of the matter is that football advanced metrics are lagging behind most other major sports due to the nature of the game but PFF comes as close as anyone to getting it right.
Eh. Being the best at something that's not a good way to analyze something doesn't make it a good way to analyze things. It just makes it better than the alternative metrics. Metrics are nice to look at but case in point below. And these are ESPN next gen but same difference really. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29939464/2020-nfl-pass-rushing-run-stopping-blocking-leaderboard-win-rate-rankings?platform=amp How are the Texans, Raiders, Titans, Patriots and Eagles in the top 15 of run defense win rate despite having bottom 15 rush defenses? The Texans at 11 despite being the worst run defense in the NFL. The Falcons are 4th in pass rush win rate despite the fact that they only had 29 sacks (24th in the NFL)? The Bills are 2nd yet had 39 sacks (15th in the NFL)? The Seahawks are 9th in pass block win rate yet allowed the 5th most sacks in the league. The Eagles are 11th and lead the league on sacks allowed. Texans with the second to worst run offense in the league rank 5th in run block win rate.
Wow. This is incredibly biased take to the point where I think you may have something personally against Zach. I agree on medical history, that is a valid point. The rest is utter poppycock. You made two points out of four above about character and leadership. The ONLY report on that came out from anonymous source was that the guy is brat, because his uncle owns Jet Blue. I personally listened to his interviews, I heard teammates asking him to come back for one more year. Read actual quotes of teammates and coaches praising his leadership. And then it turns out his uncle has 10 kids of his own to take care of and his parents are actually not that rich. The point is, your evaluation just yielded in two absolutely BS points against Zach. As far as the 3d point, first it's not even factual. Coastal Carolina is not FCS opponent, it is FBS opponent. Moreover, it is ranked in FBS. Secondly, Zach had another year of good production, his rookie year. And he did this on torn labrum. Still won Bowl game MVP with 18 for 18 performance. The only bad year he had was his second year, after he finally got shoulder surgery, missed entire offseason, and was not fully healed. Thirdly, you a readily bringing up the fact he lost one game, when a bigger point here is that this was the best record in 25 years for his school. Even Steve Young said he turned the program around after it was in crap for a while. And finally, you are using COVID as an excuse. Should we we take away SB from Tampa, it was after all COVID? Maybe we should still have kept Gase as a coach - after all it was COVID? No, this was a real season, if anything it was tougher for the players not knowing when they were going to play, etc, so to come up with an EXCUSE that a guy who stepped up in this situation should be diminished to me is just ridiculous. If anything, it's the other way around. Your posts reeks of bias, I am not sure why, but it's clear as day you are not being objective here.
I totally agree about PFF! Some people on this board cite it like it’s the Bible. Not a fan of it at all. I also watched a decent amount of CC including the whole BYU game and they were definitely solid. It just so happens that the kid who made the last tackle at the 1 is a local kid, who played with my son and Quarterbacked his HS team to a State Championship.
I can't speak to NFL Next Gen stats because I don't know their methodology, I'm pretty familiar with PFF's though. I added this to my post above: Here's a snippet of their methodology: "PFF grades every NFL player on every play on a scale of -2 to +2 using half point increments. The grades are based on context and performance. A four-yard run that gains a first down after two broken tackles will receive a better grade than a four-yard run on 3rd & 5, where the ball carrier does nothing more than expected. A quarterback who makes a good pass that a receiver tips into the arms of a defender will not negatively affect the quarterback's grade on that play, despite the overall negative result for the team." They use a ton of context. It's also inaccurate to say their analysts are amateurs. I know because I applied for a job there once and saw what was required in the application process. You basically have to break down tons of film and your results are compared to the analysts they have that have been working there for years. I would imagine those guys wouldn't still be employed if the company realized they were generally wrong. Some professional teams pay PFF to help them, after all. If they aren't better than competitors they would go out of business.
It would be a fine point, if it were true. Zach had a very good rookie year on TORN LABRUM. I was amazed how Fields stepped up with hurt ribs (turned out bruised hip) to KO Clemson, then have a decent outing against Alabama. Then later I find out Zach plays whole season as a rookie with a much more serious injury to his throwing hand, leading his team to MVP performance and victory at a Bowl game. So, this is a second good season he had. He had a good rookie year, then after shoulder surgery and struggles in the second year, he comes back with historically good campaign both statistically and for his school. I don't know what Kurt has against this guy, but after having already one good year, he improved leaps in bounds after just one off season where he could work on his game. Now I hear Kurt say the guy already reached his ceiling and is finished product? Come on now, let's be objective here for a minute.
Its perfectly objective.. Im sorry you dont wanna stare the facts in the face. Red flags are red flags.Good bad or indifferent. If anything i said it needs to be measured against upside/return. Unfortunately in my opinion theres too mich risk not enough upside.Im sorry you dont like it. To my knowledge there are 2 separate accounts questioning Wilson off the field. One from about a month & a half ago that said he wasnt a great leader & the more recent saying hes a spoiled brat. As ive said..my opinion..chances are hes a perfectly good guy & teammate..but likely not the greatest leader.Seemed fair & reasonable. And really if we’re being “objective”..what do you expect his BYU teammates to say?? Teammates came to Rosen,Geno & Manziel defense all the same. Again draw your own conclussions.. As for Coastal Carolina, they were FCS level until 2017..which means they were still playing w some FCS level players this past season & are still in their FBS infancy. BYU beats FCS OR Sunbelt level opponents by 20 in any given yr..let alone w a supposed aaron Rodgers clone. Why does covid matter? No crowd noise. Unconventional game prep.Not as many QBs to compare to bc not everybody played. A better question..how does it NOT matter?
I understand the methodology. I've read through it. I still don't think it's better than individual scouting methods. I mean in your own quoted passage they use a subjective term of a "good" pass. They also weighted Trubisky over Watson and Mahomes in 2017 and as the tenth overall prospect. Also - read the glass door reviews dude. Little pay is cited a couple times. And there's several reported salaries of $30-34k a year and $8-$15 an hour. These aren't experts. They can afford to do it because it's obviously a sought after job by football fanatics. And I also believe they hire contractors where you can do a game for couple hundred bucks.
The very fact you brought up one team they lost to, instead of 11 they beat, on the way to historically good record for the club, and you tried to diminish that team shows you are not intellectually honest. They were ranked high in FBS last year when he played them. I don't care what level they were 4 years ago. As far as COVID, yes, world is different. However, that does not mean it is now easy to have an amazing year. If anything it makes it harder to step up. Again, you are trying to diminish him because of it, which is simply invalid. Also, once again you brought up Rogers trying to diminish Zach. Did Rogers beat every opponent he faced in College - he was after all Rogers? This is not objective assessment. While schedule was a mixed bag and had cupcakes, it had some decent teams with good defenses too, including a few ranked. An objective and fair takeaway is that the record was really good historically and he turned the program around, and earned best FBS rankings for the team in 25 years. That is a very positive point. Not that he lost 1 game out of 12 to Coastal, therefore it is negative. As far as leadership, the clip I saw was the interview with Zach after last game, and unprovoked his teammates were screaming for him to come back. No one even asked them. That counts more to me than anonymous report that he was a spoiled brat because his uncle was reach, which was debunked by his teammates and coaches, also without being asked. And what is that second report month and a half about him not being a leader? You have a link, I want to read and judge for myself.
While it is true PFF hires some kids to subjectively look at the plays and that's why they suck, that's not at all how baseball analysts work so your post has some contradictions. Baseball analysts factor in variables "context" to a great measure. there is room in the NFL for analytics big time. I just happen to think PFFs approach is misguided. In baseball analytics there's a camera on every single player the whole game. And high speed cameras to analyze the pitching. PFFs doesn't have or use that. If the NFL someday starts using biometrics to a higher level during games ... THEN we will be talking analytics
Kurt, appreciate your takes, very interesting stuff. IF Wilson aint your guy this year, then who is? or is no one worthy of the no.2 overall?
