Sturm Debunks Dak and Dunk

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This comes off as disingenuous. You're a guy that regularly appeals to academia (including journal articles) to make a point. (Your many contributions on Jaylon Smith's condition are an obvious example.) Why now try to limit the discussion to jock talk?

As for Wonderboy's point, I'd have thought it was obvious: RZ QBR, he is suggesting, is too volatile (owing to small sample sizes) to have much predictive value and probably doesn't correlate with team success (or even red zone success). He hasn't provided a statistical analysis to support that point, but he's confident that he could (given the time), and has applied common sense statistical reasoning to identify a few data points that are suggestive of prima facie support.

And this looks like you're just ducking him. He has challenged your reliance on RZ QBR as a useful statistical measurement and has asked you a number of questions designed to bring out its limitations. Your refusal to engage and insistence that he "demonstrate more" rather misses his point. From his perspective, it's you that must demonstrate more before pimping RZ QBR as a useful statistical measurement of Dak's performance in the red zone.

There is a difference between posting an academic study choosing the salient passages for proof and writing a wall of text and trying to insert cross examination. I intentionally keep my posts here to 2-4 sentence paragraphs

You're right he hasn't made his point. It's why I keep calling it self assuming nonsense.

Ducking what exactly? I keep telling him to make his case. He hasn't yet. He can write more walls of texts and self assuming questions and that will not change.

And let's be clear: I've been chiding that he cannot do said analysis for over 24 hours at this point. In response I was told he was a CPA and similar big timing. He can act as confident as he would like but until he does I maintain he cannot.

I get tired of repeating myself though.

 

[percyhoward]

If a receiver runs a wrong route, and the QB overthrows it by 20 yards, what's the calculation for air yards on the attempt? If the QB reads the receiver incorrectly, and airmails the throw, what's the air yards?

If a QB throws the ball away to avoid a rush, what's the average air yards for that attempt?

Zero, zero, and zero.

 

[khiladi]

Yes, they are winning in spite of the coaching staff. This same coaching staff won exactly 1 game without Romo last year. We had the same exact Oline, and a top 5 RB. So what does that tell you? Our coaching on the offensive side of the ball is not very good at all.

Then you missed the point, because Romo had it even worse, yet you've been bashing him since forever. He didn't even have Linehan and the one season he did, he was basically MVP.

And last year, Zach Martin had a neck injury and Leary was hurt, and despite this fact, DMac in less than a full season in a zone blocking scheme had over 1000 yards. And Dez had the injury. And the starting RB in Dunbar was injured and I'm sure what they worked on in preseason as it related to the passing game with the RB was squashed.

And there was a WB carousel at QB, with a guy that didn't have a whole off-season to prepare. And Linehan didn't want Cassel, but wanted to start Moore, meaning I'm pretty sure most of that direction was from Garrett.

And then Jones came out and said they should have been able to coach some wins. And now their whole offense passing game is predicated on play-action and Linehan is totally calling a different game for Dak, so it's clearly not the fact that the Cowboys are winning despite coaching.

Linehan is doing a pretty good job in his first year with total control as OC and having a total off-season to work with Dak as a QB and in fact opening the offense up on a weekly basis through his progressions.

You'll see how far Dak would flop is his WRs are running go routes all the time and they are operating at 30th in the league in playaction..

 

[khiladi]

Tony never had a run game to help him until 2014...

Murray never bailed out Tony Romo. Was it 3 games Murray lost a fumble in the first quarter that got returned for a TD in the first six weeks of the season - or whatever it was. No, Romo wasn't always great, but his highs were much higher than Dak's have been.

And even in 2014, he only threw 75 play action passes in 15 games, and they were mainly for big chunks, while Dak is probably close to 140 (110 after the Giants game) as a staple of the passing offense. It's clear that Linehan has shifted once he's gotten more control of the offense. Prior to 2014, they were among the last in the league in play-action, hovering at 28th and 30 and in 2014, they moved to 23rd. They are well past that now in terms of attempts.

So even then defenders weren't necessarily worried about play action when Murray was here and both WRs were top 3 in the amount of go routes they ran compared to the rest of the league.

He whole organization was put on Romo's back without any help even from a coaching perspective. Garrett didn't allow him in game planning meetings until after 2013 when Jones gave him the new contract and forced it from above. And that's really when the changes philosophically started happening on offense anyways.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

Zero, zero, and zero.

Yeah, I assume Plankton is suggesting those are problematic results, if AYA is to be a useful measurement of a QB's tendency to throw downfield.

There's something to that position. Take two QBs:

1. QB1 throws 5 passes, each having a target 25 yards down the field. He completes 1 of 5 and the receiver is immediately tackled. QB1 has an AYA of 5;

2. QB2 throws 5 passes, each having a target 6 yards down the field. He completes all 5 and the receiver is immediately tackled in each case. QB2 had an (elite) AYA of 6.

Is it really accurate to say QB1 is dink and dunk, relative to QB2? In other words, I take Plankton's point (at least in part) to be that AYA unduly punishes incompletions, which are more likely where a QB chooses long-range targets.

 

[khiladi]

Well, I aced Differential Equations and Integral Theory at the University of Texas, so I think I can "decipher" something as sophisticated as yards per attempt. LOL

Sturm is great, but he gets entrenched on these all-nighter statistical gymnastics exercises way too often. He should be better than these PFF guys he loves so much, who couldn't tell a football from a rutabaga.

Dak likes to throw what's right in front of him. He gets uncomfortable (so far) if he has to throw from the pocket to the outside or downfield between the field numbers. He'll occasionally throw deep down the sideline, and he'll throw an in route up to 15 yards downfield if its in space he can see. He almost never throws before a receiver breaks a route, like veterans do all the time. He has to see it to throw it, which is why he holds the ball so long against good defenses. It'll change in time.

That doesn't take "subjectivity" to understand. It takes two eyes and a brain.

This is true, which is why he operates out of shotgun so much and very rarely does Linehan have him in traditional 3-5 or 7 step drops. And by rare, I mean very rare..

 

[Plankton]

Yeah, I assume Plankton is suggesting those are problematic results, if AYA is to be a useful measurement of a QB's tendency to throw downfield.

There's something to that position. Take two QBs:

1. QB1 throws 5 passes, each having a target 25 yards down the field. He completes 1 of 5 and the receiver is immediately tackled. QB1 has an AYA of 5;

2. QB2 throws 5 passes, each having a target 6 yards down the field. He completes all 5 and the receiver is immediately tackled in each case. QB2 had an (elite) AYA of 6.

Is it really accurate to say QB1 is dink and dunk, relative to QB2? In other words, I take Plankton's point (at least in part) to be that AYA unduly punishes incompletions, which are more likely where a QB chooses long-range targets.

My take is that it reflects an incomplete as the QB more or less dropping the ball at his feet, when that isn't what took place.

On that basis, to me, it invalidates the whole air yards per attempt. It says that the air yards only refer to completions, and everything else is excluded. That means that it really isn't per attempt, hence the stat being worthless.

 

[erod]

This is true, which is why he operates out of shotgun so much and very rarely does Linehan have him in traditional 3-5 or 7 step drops. And by rare, I mean very rare..

His comfort zone is empty backfield in the shotgun. Just like he did in college virtually every down. You can even tell with his very odd mechanical handoff style to Zeke when he works from under center.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

My take is that it reflects an incomplete as the QB more or less dropping the ball at his feet, when that isn't what took place.

On that basis, to me, it invalidates the whole air yards per attempt. It says that the air yards only refer to completions, and everything else is excluded. That means that it really isn't per attempt, hence the stat being worthless.

I think I've just expressed your take a bit differently. I agree in any case that it raises a significant concern for those who want to use air yards per attempt as a measure of a QB's tendency to throw downfield.

 

[percyhoward]

Yeah, I assume Plankton is suggesting those are problematic results, if AYA is to be a useful measurement of a QB's tendency to throw downfield.

I think he misunderstood the fact that, since the QB isn't credited for any yards on an incomplete pass, he isn't credited for any air yards either.

There is a stat called aDOT -- average depth of target -- that measures all attempts regardless of whether completed or not. But of course, that doesn't tell you what's driving that QB's success.

 

[Plankton]

Keep moving those goal posts, buddy.

You originally complained about air yards per attempt because you thought air yards counted incompletions as adding air yards somehow. Which wasn't true, it was just a thing you made up in your head in the absence of actually knowing a damn thing.

Now you're complaining about how air yards (note the difference) don't count completion percentage. That's true, and neither do yards after the catch or regular ol' yards, period. Of course that's irrelevant. Air yards per attempt (the original thing you were complaining about!) do, because it's dividing the air yards gained by the attempts, not the completions. Incompletions add 0 air yards, so the more of them you have the worse your air yards per attempt. This is elementary school math here.

Of course being proud of being ignorant instead of wanting to actually learn anything is a great American tradition.

There's no goal posts being moved at all. You cleared up something in how the stat is tabulated, but it doesn't reflect what the QB actually did. It also doesn't take into account completion percentage, drops by a receiver, misreads by the QB, etc.

Consider this - what would be the air yards for the Immaculate Reception? Would it actually reflect the throw that Terry Bradshaw made and the distance the ball traveled toward Frenchy Fuqua, his intended receiver, or would it only reflect where Franco Harris caught it after it was deflected?

It's a worthless stat. If you feel otherwise, that's your business. Unlike you, I can disagree without being insulting.

 

[Plankton]

I think he misunderstood the fact that, since the QB isn't credited for any yards on an incomplete pass, he isn't credited for any air yards either.

There is a stat called aDOT -- average depth of target -- that measures all attempts regardless of whether completed or not. But of course, that doesn't tell you what's driving that QB's success.

The depth of target stat is far more reflective of a QBs tendency to throw down the field than air yards per attempt, though there is a problem with determining the stats for throwaways and misreads by the QB or receiver.

 

[percyhoward]

On that basis, to me, it invalidates the whole air yards per attempt. It says that the air yards only refer to completions, and everything else is excluded. That means that it really isn't per attempt, hence the stat being worthless.

Since there are no yards for incomplete passes, YPA also only counts yards from completions. Does that mean YPA really isn't per attempt? Of course not. Accuracy has to be a consideration, whether you're looking at yards or air yards.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

I think he misunderstood the fact that, since the QB isn't credited for any yards on an incomplete pass, he isn't credited for any air yards either.

There is a stat called aDOT -- average depth of target -- that measures all attempts regardless of whether completed or not. But of course, that doesn't tell you what's driving that QB's success.

I don't think he misunderstood. In fact I think he's pointing at that very fact as a deficiency in AYA, in terms of indentifying dink and dunk QBs. The lack of credit for incompletions means that bombers are likely to have lower air yards per attempt (because of all the zeros their longer-range targets are likely to result in) than dink and dunk QBs who get at least some credit for their short completions.

Whatever it's other limitations, aDOT may more accurately separate bombers from dink and dunk QBs by addressing Plankton's concern.

 

[percyhoward]

The depth of target stat is far more reflective of a QBs tendency to throw down the field than air yards per attempt..

IF you're more interested in knowing what he's trying to do than what his success is based on, yes.

And using that information, we know Dak doesn't try as many short passes as most QB.

 

[khiladi]

His comfort zone is empty backfield in the shotgun. Just like he did in college virtually every down. You can even tell with his very odd mechanical handoff style to Zeke when he works from under center.

Even then, Linehan has him in play action so much, even in shotgun, because teams are scared of Zeke so much. I've been saying it that play action usage for Romo's 2014 year was 23rd in the league, which was a jump from the normal bottom dwellers. He threw it 75 times. Dak was at 110 after the Giants game and it's probably at least at 130 now. That's a whopping 55 passes out of play action." Difference with a game to play to match Romo.

Dak isn't dropping back in 3-5 step or 7 step drops and hitting WRs in a timing based offense, but he's standing backing in shotgun surveying the field and working the middle because LBs are not dropping deep because of Zeke..

Nobody wants to credit Linehan, but he's earning his paycheck..

 

[percyhoward]

Whatever it's other limitations, aDOT may more accurately separate bombers from dink and dunk QBs by addressing Plankton's concern.

Air yards per attempt is a better metric for finding out what the QB is doing that's working. Start with YPA, and just divide it into yards before and yards after the catch.

If accuracy isn't important and you just want to know what they're trying to do, you can look at the splits by target distance.

 

[Clarkson]

I'm not going to answer your self assuming nonsense. The only one here giving any numbers is me. I have asked for you to make an actual argument but all you do is piggyback. It's boring.

I would recommend working on your reading skill because I told you that I was not going to argue QB rating as a metric. Shall I quote it for you?

Have fun chasing windmills.

I've posted numbers. You've ignored them. I asked you questions regarding said numbers. You've ignored them. For the life of me, I can't figure out why.
The only numbers you've posted were the ones you got when you googled "red zone qb rating." Just a touch more research would lead most to the conclusion that that metric alone doesn't tell someone all that much.

You said Dak's play in the red zone hampers our ability to score. I posted that we are 4th in red zone TD%. Dak is 3rd in total red zone touchdowns (I even added the numbers up for you!).

I've asked you for any data that supports your hard-on for RZ QB rating. You've yet to produce anything other than pointing back to your initial post...about RZ QB rating.

My questions are meant to poke holes in your pathetically weak "argument"; choosing not to answer is your prerogative, but it's most certainly because if you do answer even one of them, your argument kind of falls flat. I've asked you some very simple questions (some were even "yes" or "no"). You've asked me to do a minimum of an hour worth of work and research.

I've asked you to provide one other shred of data or evidence that Dak isn't good in the red zone, and you've been unable to do it. I mean, come on.

 

[Plankton]

IF you're more interested in knowing what he's trying to do than what his success is based on, yes.

And using that information, we know Dak doesn't try as many short passes as most QB.

Intent does matter, yes.

And, the reason why Prescott has had success is due to him being able to consistently find open receivers and not recklessly throwing the ball into contested situations. He has also had the benefit of a strong running game, good protection, and game planning that fits his strengths. He is a remarkably smart player, on top of being poised and decisive in his throws.

Not sure that we really need to delve into stats to make that determination.

 

[ufcrules1]

Then you missed the point, because Romo had it even worse, yet you've been bashing him since forever. He didn't even have Linehan and the one season he did, he was basically MVP.

And last year, Zach Martin had a neck injury and Leary was hurt, and despite this fact, DMac in less than a full season in a zone blocking scheme had over 1000 yards. And Dez had the injury. And the starting RB in Dunbar was injured and I'm sure what they worked on in preseason as it related to the passing game with the RB was squashed.

And there was a WB carousel at QB, with a guy that didn't have a whole off-season to prepare. And Linehan didn't want Cassel, but wanted to start Moore, meaning I'm pretty sure most of that direction was from Garrett.

And then Jones came out and said they should have been able to coach some wins. And now their whole offense passing game is predicated on play-action and Linehan is totally calling a different game for Dak, so it's clearly not the fact that the Cowboys are winning despite coaching.

Linehan is doing a pretty good job in his first year with total control of the pre-season and having a total off-season to work with Dak and in fact opening the offense up on a weekly basis.

blah blah blah... Nothing but excuses. There is no excuse to only win 1 game without Romo last year for the coaching staff. So please, stop typing out long paragraphs that don't make any sense. Romo has surely had it bad here too.. I never said he didn't. However, he is not blameless. Also, he melts in win and in/playoff games of the course of his career. His stats in those games are worse than his regular season stats. He is not a winner and he is not a leader. I'm done talking about Romo.. he is done.. put a fork in him. He will be on another team next year.. we have a much better QB here now in Dak. I'm going to have to put you on ignore so I don't waste anymore time.. I will take you off after Romo is gone from the team though.