Not gonna be popular... trade Roy and Julius for #2

[dargonking999]

Not me! I'm just an average idiot...!

Writing computer programs there is a saying;

Garbage in = garbage out

well on my behalf i can write a C++ program (speaking of which i have that class in 19 miuntes) but yea, its been a long day, my brain is like poot

 

[5Stars]

why is this thread still alive?

Because you just kept it alive...? Now I did?

Any other questions?

:laugh2:

 

[5Stars]

well on my behalf i can write a C++ program (speaking of which i have that class in 19 miuntes) but yea, its been a long day, my brain is like poot

C language is almost as powerful as Assembly language...it's a good language to master! Keep at it...you can make some big money if you use logical models...

 

[junk]

I thought of an analogy, to help you understand how the data is valuable, comparatively.

Let's say you are grading a test. The answer to problem 4 is 3, but you think it is 2 - so you mark it wrong for all students. That affects the final grade, and so it's wrong, but it's wrong for everyone. So, if you are using the grades simply to compare students, and the same error is applied to all of them, it becomes irrelevent.

Same thing with those stats.

but like I said, I'm sure there will just be more discrediting of the stats, even though NFL teams pay to use them, and have offered testimonials. It's not the greatest stance, but at least it's a stance, right?

To help me understand?

Like I said, there are too many dynamics to make it a relevant stat. Let me help you understand.

Let's say STATS, INC. assigns a guy to determine a "passes completed against %" stat for all defensive backs in the NFL. First, they have to come up with a criteria to judge all players against. This is where you claim this criteria is the same for every player and therefore makes the stat valid.

However, how does STATS, INC. have any way of determining who a player was "covering"? How is a blown coverage taken into account? Would STATS, INC. know it is a blown coverage? Unlikely. So, in that scenario, who does the completed pass get counted against? Incorrectly against whoever was in the area? Or not counted at all? Or does STATS, INC. guess and assign it to someone? Each of those cases makes the stat invalid. Now apply this across every defensive back on 32 teams. Across 32 different defensive schemes and across 16 games in a season. What if they are pretty good at determining the stat in one scheme (man), but always get it wrong in another (zone). The stats become skewed towards man heavy schemes. The errors grow exponentially.

You're basing a stat on something that someone perceives (in other words, who does STATS, INC. think is responsible). That alone makes it an invalid stat.

It obviously isn't as black and white as something like a sack or an interception. However, if so, does that automatically mean that the person with the most sacks is therefore the best pass rusher or the most interceptions is the best pass defender? No, it is a piece of the puzzle.

Your "stat" (although very flawed) is only a small piece of the puzzle and not a very valuable one at that.

 

[superpunk]

Now apply this across every defensive back on 32 teams. Across 32 different defensive schemes and across 16 games in a season.

This is very important, although you can't understand why. ok.

You're basing a stat on something that someone perceives (in other words, who does STATS, INC. think is responsible). That alone makes it an invalid stat.

NFL teams disagree. As do other outlets who are paid for their analysis, as when you compare these subjective stats across outlets, they come out very similar. The fact that NFL teams are paying STATS LLC for their information, should give you an idea of how valuable an evaluating tool they are.

STATS has improved their product every year and I personally appreciate the fact that they accept feedback from me in terms of how they can improve the reports that would make year-end evaluations easier and more complete for us in Kansas City. It’s great to have STATS on my staff."

- Dick Vermeil, Former NFL Head Coach


"Your notes have been great, just great. It's just the kind of stuff I think about all week, and it's cut my work in half"

- Joe Buck, Play-by-Play, FOX Sports


"Our relationship with STATS has been great for us. They bring reliability and creativity to the table every single day. Their ability to introduce key bits of relevant information make us more viewer-friendly on every telecast and help us design unique elements for our shows."

- Bob Vorwald, Director of Production, WGN-TV


"I use their statistics a lot in the broadcast, not only in raw form but they help trigger thoughts that lead to further investigation. I use it. I trust it. I don't spend any time second-guessing; I use it as fact."

- Cris Collinsworth, Analyst, NBC Sports

Recent Super Bowl and World Series champions as well as numerous other professional teams in MLB, the NFL, the NHL, the NBA and WNBA work with STATS to receive detailed scouting reports for players and teams that translate into a winning edge on the playing field.

STATS is also a key player helping professional franchises prepare for contract negotiations and arbitration hearings.

Whether it's on-the-field game planning or front-office decision making, STATS Inc.s hands-on approach is called upon to provide winning solutions.

Holy professional evaluations, Batman!

Your "stat" (although very flawed) is only a small piece of the puzzle and not a very valuable one at that.

It's nice to have opinions.

 

[Alexander]

This is very important, although you can't understand why. ok.



NFL teams disagree. As do other outlets who are paid for their analysis, as when you compare these subjective stats across outlets, they come out very similar. The fact that NFL teams are paying STATS LLC for their information, should give you an idea of how valuable an evaluating tool they are.



Holy professional evaluations, Batman!
[/size][/font]


It's nice to have opinions.

This is not my argument, but where exactly does it say these NFL teams use the particular statistic you are referring to? I am sure many do use STATS to be a general statistic resource, but that doesn't mean they use it as a tool to evaluate.

Besides they used two imbeciles, Joe Buck and Chris Collinsworth, as testimonials. Very questionable.

 

[superpunk]

This is not my argument, but where exactly does it say these NFL teams use the particular statistic you are referring to? I am sure many do use STATS to be a general statistic resource, but that doesn't mean they use it as a tool to evaluate.

Besides they used two imbeciles, Joe Buck and Chris Collinsworth, as testimonials. Very questionable.

Dick Vermeil. (he is only listed as "former" now because he retired - that quote outlines how he used it while in Kansas City) Also at the end it outlines what their use has been for teams in all major sports.

 

[junk]

This is very important, although you can't understand why. ok.

Of course it is important, but not in the way you think it is.

You have a stats company guessing on the coverage scheme for 32 teams over 16 games. An error or assumption made for one team might be different than those made for other teams or players. There isn't a sure fire way to determine coverage responsibilities unless you are intimately familiar with the coverage schemes and defense. It's entirely guesswork.

Just because you do something wrong, but you use consistent criteria to do it, it doesn't suddenly become right.

I have the same issue with this that I do with blocking "statistics". Unless they are generated by the team's offensive line coach, they are borderline worthless. So what if you successfully blocked the guy in front of you? If it wasn't your guy, you might not grade out well internally, but some chump on his couch would give you a good grade.

Another offensive comparision would be trying to grade a QB on the percentage of the time that he threw to the correct receiver in his progression. If STATS gave you that percentage, do you think it'd be a) a true statistic and b) accurate in evaluating the play of a QB?

 

[junk]

Holy professional evaluations, Batman!
[/SIZE][/FONT]

OK, TV guys. Great example.

It's nice to have opinions.

Yes and you certainly have one. That "statistic" you are trying to pass off is simply nothing more than opinion.

 

[the kid 05]

HI guys, hows everyone doing?

 

[Dallas5274]

first off Laron Landry is not a strong safety you be fixing one problem but causing another second he has not even stepped on to a NFL field how could you say he is going to be a hall of famer Roy is one of the best safeties in the league and getting rid of him would be dumb

 

[superpunk]

OK, TV guys. Great example.

I know. Lame.

I thought Dick Vermeil coached for Double-A Dartmouth or something.

I was wrong. : .shame.

Yes and you certainly have one. That "statistic" you are trying to pass off is simply nothing more than opinion.

Well, that's not true. It's a pretty valuable tool for evaluating players, as the NFL teams paying for it can attest. I know you don't like it, because honestly it is devastating to your faulty misplaced assumption, but that is neither here nor there.

"Your honor, I object!"

"Why?"

"Because it is DEVASTATING to my case!"

"Overruled."

 

[BigDFan5]

such a great thread. "The stats make my opinion look silly therefore the STATS MUST BE WRONG!!"


Seriously trying to discredit STATS inc, who is paid by NFL Teams, ESPN, Fox Sports, and used by aynalists etc for their statistics is probably not going to work

 

[junk]

I know. Lame.

I thought Dick Vermeil coached for Double-A Dartmouth or something.

I was wrong. : .shame.



Well, that's not true. It's a pretty valuable tool for evaluating players, as the NFL teams paying for it can attest. I know you don't like it, because honestly it is devastating to your faulty misplaced assumption, but that is neither here nor there.

"Your honor, I object!"

"Why?"

"Because it is DEVASTATING to my case!"

"Overruled."

When all else fails, resort to sarcasm. :laugh2:

 

[Royal Laegotti]

But for my money, now that I know the lions want to trade that number 2 pick badly, I would package Julius Jones and Roy Williams and come away with the number 2 pick, thus having the number 2 and the number 22 in the first round..............

Then using the number 2 I would trade back for more picks to where I was sure I could comfortably get Laron Landry to replace RW, eliminating my safety problems..........

Then utilize what extra picks I had gotten to do what was necessary to also bag Lynch or one of the other top backs like Bush to replace JJ, then laugh all the way to the Super Bowl, having upgraded my team by leaps and bounds and still not having given away my draft this year to do it,........................

That would be popular with me if we had someone other than Jerry having the final say on all that activity, and if the Lions took the bait.

 

[Beast_from_East]

But for my money, now that I know the lions want to trade that number 2 pick badly, I would package Julius Jones and Roy Williams and come away with the number 2 pick, thus having the number 2 and the number 22 in the first round..............

Then using the number 2 I would trade back for more picks to where I was sure I could comfortably get Laron Landry to replace RW, eliminating my safety problems..........

Then utilize what extra picks I had gotten to do what was necessary to also bag Lynch or one of the other top backs like Bush to replace JJ, then laugh all the way to the Super Bowl, having upgraded my team by leaps and bounds and still not having given away my draft this year to do it,........................

You want to trade a player that has made the probowl every freaking year he has been in the league???

No thanks, I will keep Roy, add Hamlin, continue to develop Watkins, keep JuJo and Barber in the 2 back rotation, and take BPA at #22.