ESPN: Metrics aside, Cowboys realize value of Nick Hayden

BlindFaith said:
I'm not a fan of PFF ratings for the most part. There is far too much that goes into each play scheme wise to account for how a guy did on each and every play.

BUT, a guy rated dead last is an indicator that he does nothing special and should be replaced.
Click to expand...

One of the many problems with PFF's rating system is that the scores are cumulative. So Hayden isn't really the "worst" defensive tackle, he just has the lowest cumulative score. Most defensive tackles who are worse won't get as much playing time, so they won't accumulate a lower score.

If Hayden played less, his cumulative score would be better, and he'd be ranked higher -- even if he actually played worse when he was on the field.
 
AdamJT13 said:
One of the many problems with PFF's rating system is that the scores are cumulative. So Hayden isn't really the "worst" defensive tackle, he just has the lowest cumulative score. Most defensive tackles who are worse won't get as much playing time, so they won't accumulate a lower score.

If Hayden played less, his cumulative score would be better, and he'd be ranked higher -- even if he actually played worse when he was on the field.
Click to expand...

which is exactly why PFF rankings are garbage
 
I believe the Boys use PFF statistics but clearly they do not take notice of their ratings garbage. If so then I can imagine Jerruh looking at Marinelli and asking why the worst ranked DT in the NFL is wearing the Star.
 
AdamJT13 said:
One of the many problems with PFF's rating system is that the scores are cumulative. So Hayden isn't really the "worst" defensive tackle, he just has the lowest cumulative score. Most defensive tackles who are worse won't get as much playing time, so they won't accumulate a lower score.

If Hayden played less, his cumulative score would be better, and he'd be ranked higher -- even if he actually played worse when he was on the field.
Click to expand...

Holy cow. This has probably been mentioned many times before, but I either never bothered to read it, or it just never sank in. That's crazy.
 
another fun thing about PFF rankings is that they treat every penalty as being equal no matter what the consequences were of that penalty.

so a 5 yard offside in the first quarter is rated the same as a holding penalty in the last minute of the game.
 
Idgit said:
Holy cow. This has probably been mentioned many times before, but I either never bothered to read it, or it just never sank in. That's crazy.
Click to expand...

I don't remember seeing that which is why I pay attention to him.
 
conner01 said:
If everyone on the team knew he needed to go he would be gone. Sure seems to me the staff, who I trust , likes what they get out of him
Click to expand...

Like I said. He is obviously good enough to stick around and hold them over. But he is a weakness on our line. If it wasnt for the fact that he is surrounded by good talent, it would be more of an issue. He is definitely one area where the talent can be upgraded. And if they dont have anyone better to replace him, then why would they get rid of him?
 
AdamJT13 said:
One of the many problems with PFF's rating system is that the scores are cumulative. So Hayden isn't really the "worst" defensive tackle, he just has the lowest cumulative score. Most defensive tackles who are worse won't get as much playing time, so they won't accumulate a lower score.

If Hayden played less, his cumulative score would be better, and he'd be ranked higher -- even if he actually played worse when he was on the field.
Click to expand...

With negative values and symmetry it can still sum to zero. While more samples increases the range of possible outcomes it doesn't bias it on average away from zero.

In order to get a score that low you have to play a lot and have poor play after poor play. My issue is that the each 'score' is the whim of a man weighing how he feels about a performance. If it was one man that would be one thing but it's not it's teams of them parceled who knows what way. They present it as homogenous but that is garbage.
 
CowboyRoy said:
Like I said. He is obviously good enough to stick around and hold them over. But he is a weakness on our line. If it wasnt for the fact that he is surrounded by good talent, it would be more of an issue. He is definitely one area where the talent can be upgraded. And if they dont have anyone better to replace him, then why would they get rid of him?
Click to expand...

Very true
He is not a super star player and never will be. I would love to have a Suh type player in that spot but we have had bigger needs to fill in the draft
Maybe this off season we find a better player but till we do he is a hard worker who gets the most out of his limited talent
Those types of players are nice to have if for nothing else decent depth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 8,678 (members: 34, guests: 8,644)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,577
Messages
13,819,760
Members
23,780
Latest member
HoppleSopple
Back
Top