Outliers, YPC, and the Cowboys running game

[AbeBeta]

No he was trying to get a context of what a RB accomplished down in and down out. What you present here is a gross oversimplification.

Really? Boiling down replacing 7-8 big carries as all we need to do. The idea that 99% of what Murray did is just average stuff. That's the gross oversimplification.

More specifically to the argument you jumped in on - the OP argued that Murray was just average when you take those big plays away - his YPC dropped to the league average when the outlying runs were removed. My point was that is a stupid comparison as the league average contains numerous outliers that inflate the YPC as well. The real comparison there is against an outlier removed league average. Whatever that # is, it is going to be substantially below the 4.1 presented.

 

[Idgit]

Really? Boiling down replacing 7-8 big carries as all we need to do. The idea that 99% of what Murray did is just average stuff. That's the gross oversimplification.

More specifically to the argument you jumped in on - the OP argued that Murray was just average when you take those big plays away - his YPC dropped to the league average when the outlying runs were removed. My point was that is a stupid comparison as the league average contains numerous outliers that inflate the YPC as well. The real comparison there is against an outlier removed league average. Whatever that # is, it is going to be substantially below the 4.1 presented.

Yeah you're still misunderstanding the argument. Or just misrepresenting it on purpose. Only now I'm on a mobile device, so I'm not going to be able to make it all over again.

You'll have to make do with the posts already in the thread.

 

[AbeBeta]

Yeah you're still misunderstanding the argument. Or just misrepresenting it on purpose. Only now I'm on a mobile device, so I'm not going to be able to make it all over again.

You'll have to make do with the posts already in the thread.

Says the guy who zeroed in on an estimate of what we should compare Murrays outlier adjusted average to as the main issue raised by my argument.

 

[Beast_from_East]

RB numbers are universally based on large chunks of yardage that make up for carries that get little to nothing. Take away Peterson's 8 best runs from 2012 and his average drops by 1.35 yards/carry. Take away the 8 best runs from every starting running back and every player's average drops. Hell, take 8 of Emmitt's best runs for every year he played and he never passes Walter Payton.

It is kind of an interesting take, but I'm not sure it's something that should lead people to think that the difference between a top back and an average back is a mere 7 or 8 carries. What about the numerous carries where one back gets 4, 5 or 6 tough yards and the alternative only gets 2, 3 or 4 tough yards? What about the carries where one back gets nothing, but a lesser guy loses yards?

If you look at the top 20 backs from last year, their average is 4.4 YPC. Remove the 7 best runs from everyone and the average drops to 3.6 YPC. Murray is at 4.15 YPC without his 7 best runs, which is "average" if you consider the entire league with their best runs, but is also over 0.5 yards better than the top 20 when you've subtracted their best runs. Out of those 20 backs, only 3 averaged more than 4.0 YPC after removing their 7 best runs. Only 1 (Murray) rushed for more than 1100 yards after removing the 7 best runs from each. Additionally, if you compare each player's average to what their average would be without their 7 best runs, Murray's difference between the two is the 2nd smallest. 18 other backs had their averages hurt more than Murray did.

Not sure I see the point in comparing a guy absent his best to the average when their best is included. The league average would drop if you subtracted everyone's best plays and you'd likely end up with a situation similar to where you started.

The best 7 runs a RB has in a season inflate their numbers, but it's the other few hundred runs that make their average.

Excellent analysis

 

[Beast_from_East]

Dallas lost 5 games last year.
In 1 of them Romo was injured.
In another he was out.
In the playoff game a league rule of epic football stupidity cost us a long passing TD.

Even in a historic rushing year our limited failures were tied to Tony Romo's health and the passing game.

Teams VERY seldom pay RB big money. Those that do VERY seldom win.
Adrian Peterson has played in 4 playoff games and he is a generational RB.
Barry Sanders has often been called the best back of all-time... he played 6 playoff games, and WON ONLY 1.

Asking why teams do things is pointless because it assumes they can't make mistakes yet they obviously do.
Minnesota traded us the world for Herschel Walker and Ditka traded the world for Ricky Williams. Were those smart moves?

I see you left Emmit Smith off the list or is he no longer considered a great back since he won SBs and Barry Sanders didn't?

You also mentioned the Walker trade and Ricky Williams trade as some sort of proof that trading for a RB never works, however you failed to mentioned when a team acquired a great RB and did win a SB. For example................

1. Steelers traded a 2nd round pick for Jerome Bettis and they not only won a SB, but Bettis is the 6th leading rusher of all time.
2. Marshal Faulk traded to the Rams for 2nd and 5th round picks and Rams became the "greatest show on turf" and won the SB.

Funny how those teams didn't think plugging any scrub into the lineup was "good enough"..........the RB does matter bro, as inconvenient as that is for some.