Mike McCarthy's Analytics Fraud

[Rockport]

Look. I'm an engineer by training and now work at a big bank in investments. So yeah I like math and "analytics." I think they are instructive especially when careful study shows where what you believe to be true is in fact false. People who understand these counter-intuitive truisms claim a consistent edge.

There was much talk about how much Mike has learned in his year hiatus and how analytics was a big part of the thing he leaned on and has incorporated. And good lord he is not off to a great start. In fact it seems he is a fraud.

See below:



This is an awful quote. What he says here is the exact opposite finding from the analytics community.

In fact this is something I looked into when studying Zeke's pedestrian efficiency numbers last year (As a reminder we greatly overpaid Zeke after greatly over drafting him). But I digress....I posted this in August of last year...



What this shows is that play action passing is the most effective passes a QB can throw. And it hardly matters if you run the ball a lot. Or if you run the ball a little bit. And it does not matter if you run the ball well. Or if you run the ball poorly.

The point? If McCarthy is getting this basic thing wrong what confidence do we have that he actually learned anything in the last year, analytics or otherwise? And just like the Garrett era we can expect to give away the small edges that smart coaches understand and benefit from.

And that's a shame.

Your post is a shame. What a narcissist. How many SuperBowls have you coached and won?

 

[RJ_MacReady]

So no Championship?

I think I'm feeling sick, fellas..

 

[CATCH17]

Not saying there's nothing to what the OP is saying, but too many of these analytics posts feel like they're saying I'm smarter than this ignorant neanderthal football coach.

If McCarthy fails here, it won't be because he wasn't an analytics expert.

He won’t fail because Dallas has to firm of a foundation for any coach to fail.. Garrett kinda proved that.

Maybr when all the nuts and bolts pieces are gone and they start investing into the wrong positions will a coach not at least keep this team on mediocre territory.

 

[blueblood70]

Your post is a shame. What a narcissist. How many SuperBowls have you coached and won?

 

[ChronicCowboy]

Me: “What do you think of the McCarthy hire?”

My Eagles fan friend: “Well, it’s good for me!”

 

[Runwildboys]

Let me preface my comments by saying I’m not contradicting you or arguing any point. I’m thinking aloud.

According to pundits and players, when an offense can run the ball well (however you reach that assessment), defenses are forced to commit extra defenders near the line of scrimmage, presumably making it more difficult to defend the pass.

In the aggregate, statistics show that running ball well does not correlate to passing the ball well. But I wonder how much those stats are skewed by differences in quarterback talent—ie Aaron Rodgers is going to be more efficient than Marcus Mariota no matter how many pass defenders he’s throwing against.

Do the metrics attempt to adjust for QB talent?

In other words, do they run the ball well because they need to run the ball well?

 

[Runwildboys]

Me: “What do you think of the McCarthy hire?”

My Eagles fan friend: “Well, it’s good for me!”

Why do you have an Eagles fan friend?

 

[Risen Star]

Common sense tells you if you have a productive running game your play action should benefit from it as teams are keying on shutting it down.

 

[Rockport]

Me: “What do you think of the McCarthy hire?”

My Eagles fan friend: “Well, it’s good for me!”

Well I guess that’s the final word. Some drunken Eagles fan thinks it’s a great hire for his drunken pie hole.

 

[Boom]

If he really assembles a 14 man team that collects and analyses data properly the only way he'll be a fraud is if he looks at it and his interpretation is 'A + B = potato'

 

[RoboQB]

Your post is a shame. What a narcissist. How many SuperBowls have you coached and won?

I agree with you.

"Look at me. I'm an engineer and I work at a big bank."

Most engineers have absolutely no sense of humor and don't do well at parties.
We'd probably have this guy hanging by his ankles at a hotel balcony in Vegas... lol

 

[CowboyStar88]

Not saying there's nothing to what the OP is saying, but too many of these analytics posts feel like they're saying I'm smarter than this ignorant neanderthal football coach.

If McCarthy fails here, it won't be because he wasn't an analytics expert.

Hey CL how ya been? I absolutely agree.

 

[3rd_n_inches]

Why would he give out information that he finds to be valuable towards this teams future success?

 

[Kwyn]

Look. I'm an engineer by training and now work at a big bank in investments. So yeah I like math and "analytics." I think they are instructive especially when careful study shows where what you believe to be true is in fact false. People who understand these counter-intuitive truisms claim a consistent edge.

There was much talk about how much Mike has learned in his year hiatus and how analytics was a big part of the thing he leaned on and has incorporated. And good lord he is not off to a great start. In fact it seems he is a fraud.

See below:



This is an awful quote. What he says here is the exact opposite finding from the analytics community.

In fact this is something I looked into when studying Zeke's pedestrian efficiency numbers last year (As a reminder we greatly overpaid Zeke after greatly over drafting him). But I digress....I posted this in August of last year...



What this shows is that play action passing is the most effective passes a QB can throw. And it hardly matters if you run the ball a lot. Or if you run the ball a little bit. And it does not matter if you run the ball well. Or if you run the ball poorly.

The point? If McCarthy is getting this basic thing wrong what confidence do we have that he actually learned anything in the last year, analytics or otherwise? And just like the Garrett era we can expect to give away the small edges that smart coaches understand and benefit from.

And that's a shame.

If you’re really an engineer and use data on a regular basis you surely know that your position with this post isn’t even remotely analytical.

 

[BrassCowboy]

ehhh Me, and 61.3% of football fans don't buy into this analytics crap anyways....

An ounce of common sense is more reliable

 

[Toruk_Makto]

This is not true. Like at all.

If i've never punched you in the face....but I go through the motions and almost deck you....even if I pull up first you'll flinch.

Same concept applies.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Just because he came to a different conclusion does not make him a fraud. Your approach here is decidedly unscientific.

The right question is to ask how he came to what he found. How did he justify it? for example, PFF uses league wide stats. If a narrower focus -say on the Cowboys- showed a different outcome then he would be justified.

Obviously, show skepticism but always consider it may be you that is wrong. And equally someone else being wrong does not make them a fraud.

I don't think you actually believe he was running regressions and looking at efficiency numbers do you?

He says what people have been saying for years...a truism...that on careful study has consistently been proven false.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

The issue doesn't seem as simple as that. The same article states the following:

"Prescott also averaged 5.1 fantasy points per game (with a 133.3 passer rating) on play action passes when Elliott was on that field, with those numbers dropping to 1.9 fantasy points per game (and an 83.0 passer rating) during Elliott’s suspension weeks. Perhaps teams didn’t take the threat of play-action as seriously without Elliott on the field, and Prescott’s efficiency suffered as a result."

From the same article:
"On the other end of the spectrum we have four quarterbacks who actually posted a higher passer rating on non-play-action passes. This seemed weird to me, but perhaps the connection is all four passers’ teams also ranked bottom-10 in team rushing attempts over our sample."

Full article: https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-football-metrics-that-matter-quarterbacks-on-play-action

So McCarthy is right about establishing the run, but it seems like running effectiveness is not as important as run attempts. Also, results vary significantly from team to team and from QB to QB. I am not sure we can call Big Mac a fraud just for this statement. We also can't expect him to spill all the beans on his research. Do you think Bellicheat would willingly tell the media stuff he has found using analytics??

Rushing attempts hardly matters. Rushing effectiveness doesn't matter.

Taking a small Dak sample size or a few outliers doesn't disprove that correlation. Often times it confirms it.

In any case McCarthy is saying something demonstrably untrue.

 

[G2]

I'm impressed with how miserable some fans are in life.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This is not true. Like at all.

If i've never punched you in the face....but I go through the motions and almost deck you....even if I pull up first you'll flinch.

Same concept applies.

That is not necessarily true. If you are a child or someone has no fear of being punched then they will not flinch.

In this case front 7 players are taught to react to run keys by taking gap assignments. If the DC is not afraid of the run then they will change the keys so they stay back and/or pass rush for longer. IE instead of when you see the OL start to run block you wait until after the exchange to verify it happens.

Now with us, Zeke being on the field likely makes it such that it doesn't matter because defenses sell out to stop him no matter what. Pollard is a different animal though.

PFF stats are for the whole league and as your article pointed out the conclusions are not universal but instead break down when you look at specific offenses, RB, and the like.