Player Bias

[THE PISTONS]

(08-09-2019, 08:59 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: All I know is the needle is pointing up for both players, regardless of what hate is spewed in their direction.

It would be pretty hard for either of them to get below a 49.3 rating...

[*ochocincos*]

(08-09-2019, 01:20 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Just on memory, they seemed to use him a lot more vertically between the 20s. Which would drive me crazy and cause me to yell at the TV, "stop running verticals all the time and run him across the middle!". 

This is what I remember too.

[Whatever]

(08-09-2019, 01:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Ross's average targeted air yards was 14 so for every 20 to 30 yard deep pass there were a few short ones.  He was targeted over 50 times.  I know they were not all deep passes. 

And if Ross's success in the red zone was due to some special skill he would be able to exploit it between the 20's where he has even MORE room to work open.

Short area quickness doesn't really help on fly routes, Fred.

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 01:59 PM)Whatever Wrote: Short area quickness doesn't really help on fly routes, Fred.

And Ross ran a lot of short routes.  His average target was 14 yards downfield.  That seems like a pretty short fly route.

[Hammerstripes]

The main reason is that PFF can't really place an accurate grade on either when they have no clue what each player is supposed to be doing.

I haven't studied anyone on this team for a few years since I don't have the same amount of leisure time as I used to, but form my untrained eye I would say this:

1. Price looked pretty good in the pre-season. In fact I thought he went the entire pre-season without giving up a pressure.
2. I also thought Price looked pretty good against the Ravens until he got hurt.

All that being said, I can't say that I've ever thought Ross has looked good or even looked like he knew what he was doing. that may the reason for the optimism around Price and not Ross.

[Whatever]

(08-09-2019, 02:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And Ross ran a lot of short routes.  His average target was 14 yards downfield.  That seems like a pretty short fly route.

He ran a lot of short routes in the red zone and was highly effective.  You still haven't been able to explain how he can be running similar routes between the 20's as the redzone, but the #'s are so disparate.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-09-2019, 02:14 PM)Whatever Wrote: He ran a lot of short routes in the red zone and was highly effective.  You still haven't been able to explain how he can be running similar routes between the 20's as the redzone, but the #'s are so disparate.

I obviously don't have something like this for every game, but Joe Goodberry provided a consolidated video of every John Ross target in the Saints game last year.
https://twitter.com/JoeGoodberry/status/1061846665114591232

Outside of the Red Zone, John Ross was only thrown to one time less than 15 yards down the field, and that pass was batted at the LOS.
He caught the Red Zone target in the back of the end zone for a TD.
He caught another beautiful pass along the sideline that was a deep pass.
Dalton had one deep pass underthrown to Ross that was intercepted by the safety. If he had hit Ross in stride, it would have been in the end zone.
Another deep pass would have actually hit Ross in stride in the end zone but was broken up by Eli Apple.
The only remaining pass targeted to Ross was a deeper crosser where Ross was about 15 yards downfield and it was thrown too far out of reach for Ross to get a hand on.

So yes, Ross was primarily sent on deep routes outside of the red zone.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-09-2019, 01:59 PM)Whatever Wrote: Short area quickness doesn't really help on fly routes, Fred.

I started to type pretty much the same thing but just ended up sighing and shaking my head and then deleting it. 

(08-09-2019, 02:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And Ross ran a lot of short routes.  His average target was 14 yards downfield.  That seems like a pretty short fly route.

An average target of 14 yards is a whole lot. That should be apparent on sight alone.

Here's some perspective for you.
https://overthecap.com/yards-per-target-as-a-metric/

The average was 8.56 per target in '15.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-09-2019, 02:52 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I started to type pretty much the same thing but just ended up sighing and shaking my head and then deleting it. 



An average target of 14 yards is a whole lot. That should be apparent on sight alone.

Here's some perspective for you.
https://overthecap.com/yards-per-target-as-a-metric/

The average was 8.56 per target in '15.

Here are more statistics on John Ross.

2018 targets (receptions):
Inside 20: 11 (8) - 72.7%
Inside 10: 7 (6) - 85.7%
Outside 20: 47 (13) - 27.6%
-----------
Total: 58 (21) - 36.2%

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2018/redzone-receiving.htm

John Ross had 38% of his receptions inside the red zone and had a catch percentage of 72%, but only 19% of his targets were in the red zone. 
I think that's pretty indicative that he wasn't being used to his strength, which is shorter routes.

[Circleville Guy]

(08-09-2019, 10:38 AM)ochocincos Wrote: From what I recall, he only "quit" on a route once, maybe twice? I really don't remember more than that.
Posting the practice video was an unprofessional move, but I don't think the intention was to be malicious. I think Ross was getting tired of being hounded by fans on social media and just wanted to try to show it wasn't fully because of what people thought.

You’re obviously not buying anything that anyone gives as a reason, I’m wondering if you believe that there’s another reason? I think that everyone is disappointed with both guys but that the dissatisfaction has been a year longer with Ross and that’s why it’s a little more. It’s clear that you’re a big Ross fan and that’s cool. I’m pretty sure that we all want both of them to succeed. If neither improve this year then the dissatisfaction level will rise higher for both guys. You shouldn’t waste more than 3-4 years on a rookie that isn’t developing, regardless of talent level. If these 2 don’t show nice improvement in that time period then it’s best to go in another direction.

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 02:52 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: An average target of 14 yards is a whole lot. That should be apparent on sight alone.

14 yards is not very much if you want to claim that all he was used for was fly routes.  A J Green's average was 12.7.  Are you going to claim that all he ran was fly patterns?

For every 30 yard target Ross had that means he had about 4 10-yarders to bring his average down to 14.

And he had well over 58 targets.

[SunsetBengal]

(08-09-2019, 03:09 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Here are more statistics on John Ross.

2018 targets (receptions):
Inside 20: 11 (8) - 72.7%
Inside 10: 7 (6) - 85.7%
Outside 20: 47 (13) - 27.6%
-----------
Total: 58 (21) - 36.2%

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2018/redzone-receiving.htm

John Ross had 38% of his receptions inside the red zone and had a catch percentage of 72%, but only 19% of his targets were in the red zone. 
I think that's pretty indicative that he wasn't being used to his strength, which is shorter routes.

If he had a total of 21 catches, and 14 were inside of the 20 yard line, than that would be 67% of his receptions, not 38% as you had stated.  But yes his 78% catch rate inside the 20 is great, but he simply has to be more focused outside the 20, as that 27.6% catch rate would demonstrate.

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 02:43 PM)ochocincos Wrote: So yes, Ross was primarily sent on deep routes outside of the red zone.

In one game.

How about the rest.

[Whatever]

(08-09-2019, 03:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In one game.

How about the rest.

Why does he have a higher burden of proof than you do?

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 04:17 PM)Whatever Wrote: Why does he have a higher burden of proof than you do?

I have posted his average target distance and it proves he was not just used on fly patterns.

For every 30 yard target Ross had on average he would have to have 4 10-yarders to drop his average to 14.

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 03:42 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If he had a total of 21 catches, and 14 were inside of the 20 yard line,

The 6 inside the ten are included in the 8 inside the 20.  So he had a total of 8 not 14.

I had to look at it twice myself to figure it out.

[BengalChris]

(08-08-2019, 04:26 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: ross would not have qualified his rookie year for a ranking I don't believe

John ross year 2 was much better than year 1.  

So Far Hopkins has been a better OC than price for us.

As long as they are wearing stripes I hope they both improve and reach that draft status.

He was so bad that he didn't get a ranking. Sad. 210 yards in 13 games for a 2nd year top 10 WR pick is awful. The 7 TDs in the redzone is respectable, but limits his use. Between the 20s he was a negative factor on the field.

Price at least got a ranking his rookie year.

And people will be down on Price if he flops in his second year. I can pretty much guarantee this.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-09-2019, 03:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In one game.

How about the rest.

I already stated that the same wasn't compiled for every single game.
I'm not about to go further justify my stance by doing all that research when you haven't provided a single point to justify yours.
Besides, you're taking the 14 yard average target distance from something I originally posted on this board, so I even did that research for you.

Btw, here's another fun fact:
John Ross only had 55% of his targets as catchable balls.
That was ranked 111th in the NFL last year.
https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/john-ross/

In comparison, AJ Green had a catchable target rate of 78%. Boyd had 80.5%.

[*ochocincos*]

(08-09-2019, 03:42 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If he had a total of 21 catches, and 14 were inside of the 20 yard line, than that would be 67% of his receptions, not 38% as you had stated.  But yes his 78% catch rate inside the 20 is great, but he simply has to be more focused outside the 20, as that 27.6% catch rate would demonstrate.

You read it wrong.
The inside 10 is included in the inside 20.
The inside 10 was added to show that most of the inside 20 was actually inside 10.
I guess I should have made that more clear.

[fredtoast]

(08-09-2019, 04:52 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I'm not about to go further justify my stance by doing all that research when you haven't provided a single point to justify yours.

I have posted stats to prove my point.  It is impossible for him to have been used for nothing but deep routes when he has an average target of 14.

(08-09-2019, 04:52 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Besides, you're taking the 14 yard average target distance from something I originally posted on this board, so I even did that research for you.

I got that stat from NextGen.  https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/receiving#yards.  

Just more proof of how clueless you are.

(08-09-2019, 04:52 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Btw, here's another fun fact:
John Ross only had 55% of his targets as catchable balls.
That was ranked 111th in the NFL last year.
https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/john-ross/

Yep.  That is what happens when you run the wrong route or give up on a route.  If the receiver is not where he is supposed to be that makes the pass uncatchable.

If it was the QBs fault then all our receivers would be ranked that low, but they are not.