1. I am excited to announce the launch of ...
    NEWS and RUMORS is a powerful and versatile news and content search engine and reader that provides access to content from a large variety of sites.

    NEWS and RUMORS does not track individual users and uses a password-less login system so only an email address is required to login.

    Once logged in, you can add your favorite content feeds and searches to your Favorites list, bookmark content you want to read later, and find a lot of global, national and local content on a variety of topics.

    Dismiss Notice

Mike McCarthy's Analytics Fraud

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Toruk_Makto, Jan 11, 2020.

  1. ItzKelz

    ItzKelz Well-Known Member

    5,023 Messages
    5,909 Likes Received
    He kept Kellen.
     
    CowboyStar88 likes this.
  2. Tommy

    Tommy Well-Known Member

    1,580 Messages
    2,008 Likes Received
    Well, it was a really fun week at least.

    How many years do you think Jerry is going to put up with this before we get a “real” coach?
     
  3. gjkoeppen

    gjkoeppen Well-Known Member

    4,588 Messages
    1,846 Likes Received
    What don't you get that good rushing teams have the defense playing closer to the line of scrimmage making play action much more effective. Like I said find a new hobby because it's greatly obvious you are clueless on NFL football.
    .
     
  4. kumizi

    kumizi Well-Known Member

    2,404 Messages
    3,200 Likes Received
    Wait...is our default feeling supposed to be "we love the new Cowboys head coach hire" or should we have an honest opinion about every decision they make?

    [​IMG]
     
  5. kumizi

    kumizi Well-Known Member

    2,404 Messages
    3,200 Likes Received
    Just because you keep saying this won't make it true.

    Literally the point of this thread is that by the numbers/analytics, this isn't true.
     
  6. TheSport78

    TheSport78 The Excellence of Execution

    9,010 Messages
    1,378 Likes Received
    Yeah, let’s just have our head coach come out and completely give away what we’re planning to do offensively on a weekly basis. Good lord.
     
    CowboyStar88 and FuzzyLumpkins like this.
  7. Runwildboys

    Runwildboys Well-Known Member

    24,898 Messages
    47,531 Likes Received
    I knew what your analogy was referring to, and I agree with your assessment that play action can be successful, even when you only run 40%, but when you get right down to it, 40% isn't too far from being half the time. What's important is how well you sell the run on play action. When you watch Lamar Jackson, even on TV it's difficult to tell if he handed it off or not, while I've seen others who might as well be holding the ball up over their heads. Either way, the fake causes hesitation, but in Jackson's case it very often causes complete misdirection, which is part of the reason he can run it so effectively himself.
     
    CowboyStar88 and FuzzyLumpkins like this.
  8. Toruk_Makto

    Toruk_Makto Well-Known Member

    13,990 Messages
    17,130 Likes Received
    The obvious implication from my statement is that it is weighted by frequency among the qbs. Not an average of each qbs numbers.
     
  9. MaaS

    MaaS Well-Known Member

    364 Messages
    353 Likes Received
    McCarthy isn't an analytics guy. Not sure that many, if any, coaches are. What matters is if he listens to the insights from the analytics folks he hires and applies them correctly throughout the game. That is yet to be determined.

    It is encouraging that he at least acknowledges it matters. A huge step up from Garrett's "just beat the man in front of you" philosophy."
     
  10. kumizi

    kumizi Well-Known Member

    2,404 Messages
    3,200 Likes Received
    This is a hilarious reach.

    Coach makes a vague generalization that shows he doesn't understand analytics.

    Homer fans: He's doing to cause he doesn't want to give away our strategy.

    LOL WUT
     
  11. Toruk_Makto

    Toruk_Makto Well-Known Member

    13,990 Messages
    17,130 Likes Received
    Yes for 4 of 28 passers the trend did not hold.

    This is what we call exceptions that prove the rule.

    Thinking you're the 1 of 7 that this sample size did not hold for is the fallacy of i'm different than everyone else which leads to mistakes. As I have tirelessly argued.
     
  12. gjkoeppen

    gjkoeppen Well-Known Member

    4,588 Messages
    1,846 Likes Received
    Gee fuzzylumkin post #87 put some numbers that were copied from obviously a different site than yours that just blow you foolish idea all away.
    .
     
  13. CIWhitefish

    CIWhitefish Well-Known Member

    982 Messages
    285 Likes Received
    This is why we can't have nice things
     
  14. kumizi

    kumizi Well-Known Member

    2,404 Messages
    3,200 Likes Received
    You might want to read post #87 again. It shows that ~90% of the QBs in the NFL perform better when using play action. That is something we all agree on.

    It shows nothing about good rushing teams being more successful on play action.

    The disagreement is "you gotta be able to run the ball well to set up play action."
     
  15. Runwildboys

    Runwildboys Well-Known Member

    24,898 Messages
    47,531 Likes Received
    Nice ink, brother! Boys to the bone!
     
  16. Soth

    Soth Well-Known Member

    552 Messages
    363 Likes Received
    Do you have the data behind the article? This is not attempt to undermine your analysis. I really want to understand why you are so confident given the lack of information on the article. For example, the article states:

    "Over the past three seasons, passer rating had a 0.14 positive correlation to play-action pass attempts in games. A quarterback’s play-action passer rating was slightly impacted by the frequency of rushing attempts within a game (a 0.14 correlation), while yards per carry had a negligible effect (-0.02)."

    They argue play action is important, but it "only" has a correlation of 0.14 with passer rating. Said another way, running more play-action hardly matters? Also, they say passer rating was "slightly impacted" by rushing attempts but we know correlation numbers are not causation. I am not arguing between causation vs correlation, my point is that the article uses incorrect terms, selective metrics and inconsistent conclusions.

    I mentioned Dak because the same article that claims rushing attempts/efficiency hardly matters, then claims low play-action passer rating may be due to low attempts/efficiency.

    I think we would need to get the full set of data they are looking at. They only disclosed passer rating in PA vs non-PA and that's it. The data behind the the running game correlation stat was not disclosed.
     
    CowboyStar88 and Runwildboys like this.
  17. DOUBLE WING

    DOUBLE WING Well-Known Member

    4,711 Messages
    3,826 Likes Received
    There are two key reasons this thread is stupid:

    1.) McCarthy never claimed to be an analytics guru. He said he spent a day with PFF to learn more, and that he plans to incorporate an analytics department to help the organization make more informed, analytical-based decisions. We should hold him to that. What we should not hold him to, is being an expert in all-things advanced statistics on day one of his hire. His job isn't to study the in's and out's of all the deep-dive data, his job is to put people in place who do and listen to them.

    2.) All this whining is over a simple quote, that if you trace it back to its origin, it is really a cat-chasing-its-tail game with the DFW media, and the sole reason this is even a debate is because the major critique of him in the past was that he abandoned the run and threw the ball way too much. The origin of McCarthy's "run to set up the pass" quote was at the introductory press conference, where someone asked something to the effect of "should fans be concerned that Dallas has the highest-paid RB in the league, and you're known for being a past-first coach?" and McCarthy gave some sort of quote about leaning on the running game, likely to assuage some of those concerns. Then, as a follow-up, Jane Slater asked him about the running game quote and how it runs counter-productive analytics and he gave the canned answer we got in the OP. There's no reason to try to read between the lines on anything here.
     
  18. nightrain

    nightrain Since 1971

    6,628 Messages
    10,957 Likes Received
    Just win ball games. Analytics is useful, but data can be misinterpreted or misrepresented making the analysis less than ideal.
     
    CowboyStar88 and Runwildboys like this.
  19. FuzzyLumpkins

    FuzzyLumpkins The Boognish

    31,564 Messages
    21,888 Likes Received
    There is no obvious implication. Your OP did not differentiate between QBs. The breakdown was of various biases within the average. It was still derived from the average.

    When the breakdown was of the individual QBs your conclusion broke down. Given the mechanics of how teams gameplan against offenses and how defenders react within a play it makes sense.

    At the end of the day, the key is getting defenders to react to run looks instead of staying back or continuing to rush the QB.
     
    Luther and CowboyStar88 like this.
  20. Soth

    Soth Well-Known Member

    552 Messages
    363 Likes Received
    "Fallacy"
    "Demonstrably untrue"

    As a side note, you said you are an investment banker, but you sound more like a philosopher. I have nothing against philosophers this is just an observation.
     
    Toruk_Makto likes this.

Share This Page