munde53

Nick Chubb 2019 Outlook

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, K197040 said:

 

Obviously I was kidding.  My point was that long runs don't always equate with explosiveness.    I like Chubb, but I think using RPC to evaluate hims doesn't make a lot of sense.   I think for Chubb, those are anomalies. Even SnowBeast would have made those runs.  

Obviously I agree with your first point - no one in their right mind wouldn’t.  But even if we ignore YPC and just consider the fact that, in effectively half a season, he managed 11 20-yard runs and 4 40-yard runs, while receiving virtually the least amount of blocking help from his line, it becomes eminently clear that this isn’t an example of an “anomaly.”  And that’s even if we simply ignore how explosive he was in college.

There’s nothing wrong with using YPC as one metric for evaluating a RB - so long as you don’t rely on it exclusively.  Which, incidentally, no one has in this thread to my knowledge (even in the post that supposedly started the debate that you quoted). All stats are “contextual,” in that you need to understand external factors to make sense of the number you’re looking at it.  YPC isn’t an exception there.  That shouldn’t stop us from using any of them to build a picture of a player’s performance.

I’m going to leave the SnowBeast reference alone - I know he’s your boy, so, if you think he’s as good as Chubb all things being equal, you’re entitled to that opinion, however vehemently I may disagree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dashoe said:

which is why it's better to use other metrics such as dyar,dvoa,succession in comparing rb's. YPC is a pisss poor metric for efficiency.

 Care to share any shortcomings of DYAR, DVOA, & Success Rate might have when comparing rbs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barkley 2018 Rankings:

#15 DYAR

#19 DVOA

#40 Success Rate

#5 YPC (rbs with >150 carries)

#1 FF RB Scoring

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, psygolf said:

 Care to share any shortcomings of DYAR, DVOA, & Success Rate might have when comparing rbs?

I’d recommend reading the following, particularly “Issues with DVOA/DYAR.”  In short, the main issue - one which FO readily admits, refreshingly - is that these stats still don’t provide a very reliable gauge of an individual football player’s performance, especially if that player has only played part time:

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to individual player ratings, we are still far from the point at which we can determine the value of a player independent from the performance of his teammates. That means that when we say, "In 2014, Marshawn Lynch had a DVOA of 23.1%, what we are really saying is “In 2014, Marshawn Lynch, playing in Darrell Bevell’s offensive system with the Seattle offensive line blocking for him and Russell Wilson selling the keeper when necessary, had a DVOA of 23.1%."

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods

Edited by BMcP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dmb3684 said:

Who is Snowbeast?

Jordan Howard. It was a running joke that he would pick up steam in colder weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BMcP said:

I’d recommend reading the following, particularly “Issues with DVOA/DYAR.”  In short, the main issue - one which FO readily admits, refreshingly - is that these stats still don’t provide a very reliable gauge of an individual football player’s performance, especially if that player has only played part time:

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to individual player ratings, we are still far from the point at which we can determine the value of a player independent from the performance of his teammates. That means that when we say, "In 2014, Marshawn Lynch had a DVOA of 23.1%, what we are really saying is “In 2014, Marshawn Lynch, playing in Darrell Bevell’s offensive system with the Seattle offensive line blocking for him and Russell Wilson selling the keeper when necessary, had a DVOA of 23.1%."

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods

I've read it...a few years ago.

One gets excited that they might be "on-to" something when you first come across their stats and do not look at their methods...they lost me once I saw that they subjectively score the yardage of each run differently depending on whether it happened on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb faced a 8+ in the box 34% of the time last year...#5 most in the NFL.    

YPC looking even better now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, psygolf said:

I've read it...a few years ago.

One gets excited that they might be "on-to" something when you first come across their stats and do not look at their methods...they lost me once I saw that they subjectively score the yardage of each run differently depending on whether it happened on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down.

 

Sorry, I didn’t realize your question above was rhetorical - in any event, I thought it might be helpful to others to have the info on hand.

Any time you’re inventing your own rating system, you’re not going to be able to avoid a healthy dose of subjectivity.  At least they explain their rationale: i.e., the “value” (V) of a given running event shouldn’t simply be the yards gained on that run, but rather should in some way account for the game context (in terms of down/distance).  It’s not an irrational concept.

Edited by BMcP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one follow-up thought: if you’re looking at performance purely from a fantasy perspective, you may not particularly care about the real-world “value” that a player contributed on a given play in terms of helping his team win the game.  

In an extreme example, if your fantasy player kept picking up chunk yardage on 4th-and-forevers, you might have absolutely no complaint from a fantasy standpoint even though, from a real-world “value” perspective, those runs are virtually worthless.  I fully realize that’s a totally unrealistic example, but I indulged in a hyperbolic example to illustrate the distinction between fantasy and real-world value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Sorry, I didn’t realize your question above was rhetorical - in any event, I thought it might be helpful to others to have the info on hand.

Any time you’re inventing your own rating system, you’re not going to be able to avoid a healthy dose of subjectivity.  At least they explain their rationale: i.e., the “value” (V) of a given running event shouldn’t simply be the yards gained on that run, but rather should in some way account for the game context (in terms of down/distance).  It’s not an irrational concept.

If their methodology does not give Chubb more points for a 3yard carry on 3rd & 2 vs the points given to Gurley in the same situation, then it has failed in what it is attempting to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Just one follow-up thought: if you’re looking at performance purely from a fantasy perspective, you may not particularly care about the real-world “value” that a player contributed on a given play in terms of helping his team win the game.  

In an extreme example, if your fantasy player kept picking up chunk yardage on 4th-and-forevers, you might have absolutely no complaint from a fantasy standpoint even though, from a real-world “value” perspective, those runs are virtually worthless.  I fully realize that’s a totally unrealistic example, but I indulged in a hyperbolic example to illustrate the distinction between fantasy and real-world value.

Even though I’ve never seen anything close to that extreme player...Wouldn’t he still have to be talented to get these “chunks of yards” even though it didn’t result in a 1st down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, psygolf said:

If their methodology does not give Chubb more points for a 3yard carry on 3rd & 2 vs the points given to Gurley in the same situation, then it has failed in what it is attempting to do.

Honestly, I have no idea which factors FO uses in its formula - if I had to guess, it would encompass much more than simply down and distance: off the top of my head,  score, time left on the clock, prevailing performance trends throughout the game, and any known talent disparities between offensive and defensive units would be likely candidates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, psygolf said:

Even though I’ve never seen anything close to that extreme player...Wouldn’t he still have to be talented to get these “chunks of yards” even though it didn’t result in a 1st down?

Maybe, maybe not - again, acknowledging it’s an extreme and unrealistic example, it wouldn’t require an especially talented player to rack up rushing yardage if the RB’s team was down by a ton and the RB was being given carries on late downs with a ton of yardage needed for a first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Honestly, I have no idea which factors FO uses in its formula - if I had to guess, it would encompass much more than simply down and distance: off the top of my head,  score, time left on the clock, prevailing performance trends throughout the game, and any known talent disparities between offensive and defensive units would be likely candidates.

They give no indication that a lot of what you mentioned, especially the # of people in the box, is being taken into account...so I cannot give them the benefit of the doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Maybe, maybe not - again, acknowledging it’s an extreme and unrealistic example, it wouldn’t require an especially talented player to rack up rushing yardage if the RB’s team was down by a ton and the RB was being given carries on late downs with a ton of yardage needed for a first.

True...but to date, there hasn’t been a player that made their mark in the NFL that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, psygolf said:

They give no indication that a lot of what you mentioned, especially the # of people in the box, is being taken into account...so I cannot give them the benefit of the doubt.

No need: 

 

Every single play run in the NFL gets a “success value” based on this system, and then that number gets compared to the average success values of plays in similar situations for all players, adjusted for a number of variables. These include down and distance, field location, time remaining in game, and the team’s lead or deficit in the game score. Teams are always compared to the overall offensive average, as the team made its own choice whether to pass or rush. When it comes to individual players, however, rushing plays are compared to other rushing plays, passing plays to other passing plays, tight ends to tight ends, wideouts to wideouts, and so on.”

Edited by BMcP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we have re-established that Cleveland has 2 bona fide studs at rb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, psygolf said:

True...but to date, there hasn’t been a player that made their mark in the NFL that way.

Ok...maybe just think of it in these terms: while we are primarily concerned with the “fantasy” value of a given player, stats like DVOA/DYAR are more concerned with measuring a player’s real-world contribution to his team’s chances of winning a real-world game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BMcP said:

No need: 

 

Every single play run in the NFL gets a “success value” based on this system, and then that number gets compared to the average success values of plays in similar situations for all players, adjusted for a number of variables. These include down and distance, field location, time remaining in game, and the team’s lead or deficit in the game score. Teams are always compared to the overall offensive average, as the team made its own choice whether to pass or rush. When it comes to individual players, however, rushing plays are compared to other rushing plays, passing plays to other passing plays, tight ends to tight ends, wideouts to wideouts, and so on.”

I like their stats/effort...but I am near done arguing that it has no real value, it’s starting to feel like the hurt feelings in a ffcollusion chart debate.

Nobody has ever claimed they effectively used them to identify talent...for ff or real purposes.  

If anything, it will steer you in the wrong direction in 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um...if anything, I tend to agree with you insofar as it applies to evaluating individual players for fantasy purposes.  That’s kind of my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Ok...maybe just think of it in these terms: while we are primarily concerned with the “fantasy” value of a given player, stats like DVOA/DYAR are more concerned with measuring a player’s real-world contribution to his team’s chances of winning a real-world game.

i agree that they are trying to accomplish that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, psygolf said:

 Care to share any shortcomings of DYAR, DVOA, & Success Rate might have when comparing rbs?

 

When compared to YPC  they are a premium cut above YPC. . :lol:

 

For some odd reason you believe I am a proponent to one set of metrics.

Here let me clue you in before you get lost down some silly rabbit hole.   DaShoe is one who embraces multiple sources of analytical information. I utilize FO, PFF, numberfire, rotviz, airyards and a few other analytics guys I follow on twiter and other platforms that allow me to glean any helpful data.

What I don't subscribe to is YPC as it is bandied around this site as a  meaningful metric. . :lol:

Edited by dashoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BMcP said:

Ok...maybe just think of it in these terms: while we are primarily concerned with the “fantasy” value of a given player, stats like DVOA/DYAR are more concerned with measuring a player’s real-world contribution to his team’s chances of winning a real-world game.

 

I'll simplify it for you. I am on an anti-YPC tirade and psygolf is on an anti-football outsiders tirade; only he never realized I wasnt  debating how great of a site FO is.

I just think using ypc to define a stud rb is a terrible mertric. when you realize that aaron jones,lindsay,kerryon,breida,gus and Ekeler either finished higher than or equal to Chubb in the top 5 ypc. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good lord can we chill with the ypc debate in the Chubb thread?? Slogging through this "debate" has probably made everyone's chubb go flaccid. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...