Interesting Dak stat EPA advanced metric

[ElGatoGrande]

He did that for Beasely last week.

actually that pass was short, but a nice start. More please.

 

[bayeslife]

Good stuff but how good is EPA as a metric? Would love to use this stat vs Eagles fans

 

[phildadon86]

actually that pass was short, but a nice start. More please.

Ive been noticing every week he is taking more shots down field. Week one, was all short, minus the one dropped by Dez, week 2 he took more shots downfield, week 3 would have had a very long TD if not for a blatant PI on Butler. He can make the throws, its whether the coaching staff allows him to make them.

 

[VACowboy]

Prescott has gotten less help from the design of his offense...

Who'd a thunk?

 

[VACowboy]

Expected points added.

http://www.advancedfootballanalytic...s-explained/expected-points-and-epa-explained

Very interesting.

 

[Kaiser]

Looks like we might need to start a sticky tab for the Wentz vs Dak opinions.

"Cowboyszone asks you to post all Wentz threads in the Wentzzone"

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What's EPA?

E Per Attempt...

The second link he gave but it is expected points added. They have what they consider average QB play. EPA measures how many points his team would score with him at QB as opposed to if that 'average QB' was in there.

 

[Seven]

Wentz is doing better in the PFF rating. Dak is doing better in the ESPN QBR rating and now this measure.

The Sevenometer has Wentz looking horrid in the Eagle puke green where as Dak wears the silver and blue well.

Dak is better.

 

[erod]

Stats are stupid. This is a prime example.

I think the top four passers last weekend in yardage.....all lost.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Stats are stupid. This is a prime example.

I think the top four passers last weekend in yardage.....all lost.

They're often the top passers in yardage BECAUSE they lose. When you're behind in the second half, you're passing to catch up. If you want to correlate something to winning, gross yardage is about the last thing you'd want to look at.

Stats aren't stupid. Using them incorrectly, or using the wrong ones, is the problem.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Wentz is doing better in the PFF rating. Dak is doing better in the ESPN QBR rating and now this measure.

Football Outsiders has them in a dead heat in their DVOA metric (not yet adjusted for defenses - that comes later in the season): Wentz 32.5%, Dak 32.4%.

 

[AbeBeta]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr/_/sort/cwepaPassesCondensed

http://www.advancedfootballanalytic...s-explained/expected-points-and-epa-explained

No matter how advanced the metric, it is based on a ridiculously small sample and will be moved greatly by a single great or bad game

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Of course Prescott is better.

 

[Risen Star]

Wentz is doing better in the PFF rating. Dak is doing better in the ESPN QBR rating and now this measure.

Wentz is 1st in RSR (Risen Star Rating) Rayne Dakota is 29th.

 

[Risen Star]

What's EPA?

E Per Attempt...

Yes. It's how many E's per attempt. Debatable how important that is.

 

[DandyDon52]

both are doing very good, lets wait and compare when we play the eagles.
Although by that time I expect romo to play. And then all the dak stats wont matter.

 

[percyhoward]

Wentz is doing better in the PFF rating. Dak is doing better in the ESPN QBR rating and now this measure.

ESPN's metric relies heavily on EPA. Dak's performance on 3rd down is mainly why he's rated so high.

For example, when a team has a 3rd and 8 on its own 40, history tells us that it scores X number of points at the end of that drive. Those are the expected points. Converting in that situation moves the team closer to scoring, gives them a new set of downs, and adds to the number of points it can expect to score at the end of the drive -- expected points added.

 

[percyhoward]

Good stuff but how good is EPA as a metric? Would love to use this stat vs Eagles fans

Depends on what you want to measure. If you want to know who was the most responsible for the team's success, it's a good stat. If you want to know which QB is doing more of the things that lead to wins (even if some other player may get a bigger share of the credit), use traditional passer rating.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Depends on what you want to measure. If you want to know who was the most responsible for the team's success, it's a good stat. If you want to know which QB is doing more of the things that lead to wins (even if some other player may get a bigger share of the credit), use traditional passer rating.

I would caveat that by saying that passer rating completely ignores a number of aspects of QB play by not taking into account QB running, sacks or fumbles. For most QBs, the deltas here are minor, but it will underrate the things a Cam Newton does with his feet and it won't penalize guys who stand back there too long and get sacked a ton.

 

[percyhoward]

I would caveat that by saying that passer rating completely ignores a number of aspects of QB play by not taking into account QB running, sacks or fumbles. For most QBs, the deltas here are minor, but it will underrate the things a Cam Newton does with his feet and it won't penalize guys who stand back there too long and get sacked a ton.

Right, it's better to say "even if some other player may get a bigger share of the credit, or something other than passing is a big part of the QB's contribution."