Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38
Like Tree20Likes

Thread: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

  1. #16
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    I can't wait to see Bradford have his say.
    Unfortunately Bradford only knows how to talk in touchdowns and victories, so I guess we'll have to deal with that.


  2. #17
    Nick_Weasel's Avatar
    Nick_Weasel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    737
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    There are a lot of (minor) complaints I have about FO from a statistical perspective, but fundamentally what they're attempting to do is a "moneyball" type of analysis for football. And that's a good thing.

    DYAR is a widely used metric, one that FO came up with. You can argue against the analysis, but trashing it because you've never heard of DYAR or because it contradicts what you just "know" to be true is silly and wrong-headed.

  3. #18
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,049
    Rep Power
    171

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_Weasel View Post
    There are a lot of (minor) complaints I have about FO from a statistical perspective, but fundamentally what they're attempting to do is a "moneyball" type of analysis for football. And that's a good thing.

    DYAR is a widely used metric, one that FO came up with. You can argue against the analysis, but trashing it because you've never heard of DYAR or because it contradicts what you just "know" to be true is silly and wrong-headed.
    First of all, its not a "widely used metric" by any means.

    More importantly, even if it was, it does not account for poor O line play, receivers who don't get open, receivers who don't catch the ball, and the problems associated with trying to install a complicated offensive scheme with a highly abbreviated offseason.

    As Paul Harvey used to say... now you know, the rest of the story.

  4. #19
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_Weasel View Post
    There are a lot of (minor) complaints I have about FO from a statistical perspective, but fundamentally what they're attempting to do is a "moneyball" type of analysis for football. And that's a good thing.

    DYAR is a widely used metric, one that FO came up with. You can argue against the analysis, but trashing it because you've never heard of DYAR or because it contradicts what you just "know" to be true is silly and wrong-headed.
    Wins is a widely used metric too for QBs, and out of all the sports where people point to the win-loss record of an individual (Pitchers, goalies) it is the most worthless of all in football. Just because a statistic is widely used does not give it credibility.

    Also, I agree with Avenger, DYAR is not widely used. Not to mention the idea of having value over or below a replacement player in football is considerably more speculative than it is in baseball, where it is also criticized. Those type of metrics assume a certain "baseline" for an average player. But then defining what an average quarterback should be is significantly different from baseball. In baseball, the players are somewhat isolated from each other, and play a huge number of games giving a large sample. In football they are not isolated, and their performance depends much more heavily upon the performance of those around them, as well as their schedule for the year considering the fact they only play 16 games when there are 32 teams.

    To me, you can't translate the same concept from baseball of value over replacement player into the NFL. The sample sizes just aren't large enough, both in number of games, and number of other players to weigh averages against.

    I'll tell you what works best. Watching the game and evaluating the players using a technique the average fan doesn't like: Scouting. Fans constantly hunger for more and more statistics so they can use those statistics to place values on players and determine who is better. But once again, the sample sizes that the NFL offers, and the limited amount of teams faced, just aren't sufficient to compare players in that manner. You have to actually watch the games.

    And I will tell you this, I did watch the games, every single one for the last two years, plus games from other teams, and Sam Bradford was not the worst starting QB in the NFL. Book it.

  5. #20
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,574
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Public perception is that Bradford regressed following his rookie campaign. In reality, Bradford has put up lousy numbers now for two seasons in a row, ranking 39th or lower in DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) both seasons.
    He broke Peyton Manning's mark for completions in a season by a rookie, with 354 of his attempts reaching receivers.

    Here is a real lousy number: Set the rookie record for most attempts without an interception, going 169 passes between picks. That's playing almost five games (4.7) throwing 35 passes without a pick.

    More lousy numbers: Bradford became the first rookie in NFL history to pass for at least 300 yards and three touchdowns with no interceptions during a road victory.

    That public perception must have helped Bradford become the first rookie QB to win two consecutive Offensive Rookie of the Month awards. They forgot to look at his DYAR numbers I guess.

    Rookie campaigns

    Bradford: 3,512 yards, 18 TD, 15 INT, 60 percent comp. pct., 354 completions, 7-9 record

    Manning: 3,739 yards, 26 TD, 28 INT, 56.7 percent comp. pct., 326 completions, 3-13 record

    Bradford: 3,512 yards, 18 TD, 15 INT, 60 percent comp. pct., 354 completions, 7-9 record

    Matt Ryan: 3,440 yards, 16 TD, 11 INT, 61.1 percent comp. pct., 265 completions, 11-5 record

    Bradford: 3,512 yards, 18 TD, 15 INT, 60 percent comp. pct., 354 completions, 7-9 record

    Joe Flacco: 2,971 yards, 14 TD, 12 INT, 60 percent comp. pct., 257 completions, 11-5 record

    Bradford: 3,512 yards, 18 TD, 15 INT, 60 percent comp. pct., 354 completions, 7-9 record

    Ben Roethlisberger (in 13 games): 2,621 yards, 17 TD, 11 INT, 66.4% comp. pct., 196 completions, 13-0 record
    Last edited by Rambos; -08-25-2012 at 10:42 AM.
    Tampa_Ram likes this.

  6. #21
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,082
    Rep Power
    131

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_Weasel View Post
    DYAR is a widely used metric, one that FO came up with.

    Well, we know it was used by Verhei to make the determination that Bradford is one of the worst QB's in the league, other than that..............

  7. #22
    Nick_Weasel's Avatar
    Nick_Weasel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    737
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    First of all, its not a "widely used metric" by any means.

    More importantly, even if it was, it does not account for poor O line play, receivers who don't get open, receivers who don't catch the ball, and the problems associated with trying to install a complicated offensive scheme with a highly abbreviated offseason.

    As Paul Harvey used to say... now you know, the rest of the story.
    Well whether it's widely used is irrelevant, let me say it's "widely used in some circles" and leave it at that.

    And actually, it does account for many situational things, including some of the things you listed. For example, they actually watch the tape, the coach's tape, play by play. Balls that are dropped are not counted against the QB (in fact, if it was a catchable ball, that's like a completion if memory serves). Nor do balls that were intentionally thrown out of bounds. Sacks count differently depending on how long the QB held the ball, etc.

    And installing a complicated offensive scheme with a highly abbreviated offseason is an explanation for poor play, not a reason why we should refuse to acknowledge that it is poor play.

  8. #23
    Trevor's Avatar
    Trevor is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vicenza, Italy From Hagerstown, MD
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,317
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    ABsolutely the dumbest article ever.

  9. #24
    Nick_Weasel's Avatar
    Nick_Weasel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    737
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by berg8309 View Post
    Wins is a widely used metric too for QBs, and out of all the sports where people point to the win-loss record of an individual (Pitchers, goalies) it is the most worthless of all in football. Just because a statistic is widely used does not give it credibility.

    Also, I agree with Avenger, DYAR is not widely used. Not to mention the idea of having value over or below a replacement player in football is considerably more speculative than it is in baseball, where it is also criticized. Those type of metrics assume a certain "baseline" for an average player. But then defining what an average quarterback should be is significantly different from baseball. In baseball, the players are somewhat isolated from each other, and play a huge number of games giving a large sample. In football they are not isolated, and their performance depends much more heavily upon the performance of those around them, as well as their schedule for the year considering the fact they only play 16 games when there are 32 teams.

    To me, you can't translate the same concept from baseball of value over replacement player into the NFL. The sample sizes just aren't large enough, both in number of games, and number of other players to weigh averages against.

    I'll tell you what works best. Watching the game and evaluating the players using a technique the average fan doesn't like: Scouting. Fans constantly hunger for more and more statistics so they can use those statistics to place values on players and determine who is better. But once again, the sample sizes that the NFL offers, and the limited amount of teams faced, just aren't sufficient to compare players in that manner. You have to actually watch the games.

    And I will tell you this, I did watch the games, every single one for the last two years, plus games from other teams, and Sam Bradford was not the worst starting QB in the NFL. Book it.
    I brought up that it was widely used because people were suggesting the reverse. Of course its prevalence doesn't determine its validity, was just saying it's not like it's a metric that came out of nowhere.

    The point about baseball players being more isolated than football players is spot on. Adjustments are made, but it's impossible to separate players' performance from that of their teammates in the same way you can in baseball. But they acknowledge this, even in the article that was posted. And they attempt to correct for it.

    Sample size is an issue, but note that it's mitigated by the fact that the typical football player is involved in far more plays/game than the typical baseball player. If you're talking about at bats, the typical player gets what, 4-5? A QB can throw 10 times many times in a game. A workhorse RB gets 20+ touches. Nothing can compare to a baseball pitcher, but the sample size isn't as huge an issue as it may first appear.

    So yes, watching the game is best. Nothing can compare to that, because you see all the context that is lost in simple statistics. FO attempts to incorporate some of that context - somehow people think that somehow makes it worse than naive completion %, which doesn't address those issues at all.

    I agree about Bradford, my only point is that people are criticizing something without truly understanding it, IMO.

  10. #25
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,438
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Like Lebron this year Sam has to get it done...we can complain and make excuses about our injury luck, our line or our wide receivers all we want but I believe this guys argument holds some weight i dont know about u guys but last year was just god awful watching us not gain many yards or TDs and Sam deserves some blame

    I dont know about u guys but it pained me to see John Skelton put up wins with that o-line he had, or see tavaris Jackson lead that team that had more injuries than ours

    I believe in Sam and the direction our coaching staff is going but guys Bradford is known as a franchise QB and last year he (as the Verhei guy says) was a lousy season

    I know stats do not mean everything but its not a good thing when Rex Grossman and Colt McCoy (2 guys that got replaced by rookie QBs) had statistically better seasons than your franchise QB...and o yea both those teams did not have much talent


    im sorry guys I like this article; it means SAM HAS SOMETHING TO PROVE And im anticipating him silencing this critic; but right right now as i type this the article holds some weight

  11. #26
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,049
    Rep Power
    171

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_Weasel View Post
    And actually, it does account for many situational things, including some of the things you listed. For example, they actually watch the tape, the coach's tape, play by play. Balls that are dropped are not counted against the QB (in fact, if it was a catchable ball, that's like a completion if memory serves). Nor do balls that were intentionally thrown out of bounds. Sacks count differently depending on how long the QB held the ball, etc.
    Based upon this vague description, all you've done is demonstrate that this isn't an objective statistical analysis at all. Who's to say what a "catchable ball" is? And why should a QB be penalized for a sack that occurs after the QB holds the ball - maybe nobody was open, maybe the play was designed to take longer to develop.

    Once you bring subjective evaluations into the mix, it ceases to be an objective statistical analysis, and becomes little more than a subjective evaluation.

    If you want to assign meaning to this, that's your choice. I think the notion that Sam is among the worst starting QBs in the NFL is absurd.

  12. #27
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,874
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    I absolutely disagree with Football Outsiders' claim that Bradford could be considered the worst starting QB in the league, but I also disagree with the trend this offseason of completely shouting down or discounting any "national voice" that has made critical observations about Sam.
    VegasRam and BarronWade like this.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  13. #28
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,574
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I absolutely disagree with Football Outsiders' claim that Bradford could be considered the worst starting QB in the league, but I also disagree with the trend this offseason of completely shouting down or discounting any "national voice" that has made critical observations about Sam.
    I'm done talking about the past when it comes to Bradford. Lets stay in the present.

    Bradford posted a 144.4 passer rating, going 6 of 9 for 102 yards and two touchdowns, in a 31-17 home win over Kansas City.
    As soon as he starts putting up numbers this year the national media will be jumping on the bandwagon.

  14. #29
    Alpha_Male is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    116
    Rep Power
    4

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Hard to judge how good a quarterback is when he's only had two seasons, one as a rookie and the other his 2nd year where he, the receivers, the running backs, and the offensive line were all plagued by injuries.

    What shocks me is that this is Bradford's 3rd year and still they haven't got him a go to receiver. Almost every young QB in the league has one except Bradford. Almendola should be a 3rd down specialist not a go to guy.

  15. #30
    Nick_Weasel's Avatar
    Nick_Weasel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    737
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: Tipsheet: The Case Against Sam Bradford

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Based upon this vague description, all you've done is demonstrate that this isn't an objective statistical analysis at all. Who's to say what a "catchable ball" is? And why should a QB be penalized for a sack that occurs after the QB holds the ball - maybe nobody was open, maybe the play was designed to take longer to develop.

    Once you bring subjective evaluations into the mix, it ceases to be an objective statistical analysis, and becomes little more than a subjective evaluation.

    If you want to assign meaning to this, that's your choice. I think the notion that Sam is among the worst starting QBs in the NFL is absurd.
    Vague description? I didn't realize it was my responsibility to educate you on a metric that you declared useless. If you want to learn about it, read about it at their website.

    The complaint with using naive statistics is that they don't take into account subjective evaluations and context. Analysis that does do that, however, is bunk because it's no longer objective. You can't have it both ways. You can't use "objective" metrics in his rookie year to prove how great he is, then switch to subjective analysis in his 2nd year... but only Av-approved analysis that comes to the conclusion that Bradford is a top-5 QB.
    Last edited by Nick_Weasel; -08-25-2012 at 12:50 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tipsheet: Rams Get Chance To Supplement WR Corps
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -07-13-2012, 03:31 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: -06-08-2012, 05:42 PM
  3. Tipsheet: Did Rams hire an outlaw coordinator?
    By MauiRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -03-05-2012, 03:26 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -01-03-2011, 03:28 PM
  5. Bradford Makes Strong Case For No. 1
    By r8rh8rmike in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -03-30-2010, 11:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •