05-01-2023, 01:17 PM
I can't post the HTML table here, so no real great way of posting it but I was doing some work this morning on PFF's Elusiveness Rating. I think it ends up being a valuable metric to use to identify running backs who are able to create value by themselves. The metric creates a ratio of missed tackles forced to total touches and then calculates the impact of those missed tackles forced by looking at what the players average yards after contact is. So, high elusiveness rating means they are forcing a lot of missed tackles that also provide value and allow them to gain more yardage after the fact.
I took it a little bit further and transformed it into a + stat. Baseball fans will be familiar with it, but I transformed the metric to have 100 reflect league average. 110 is good, 120 is great, 130 is amazing. Anything below 90 is really bad, and below 80 is legendarily bad. Mixon scored an 86. He was in the 10th percentile of all running backs with a minimum of 50 carries in 2022. The interesting thing is that these ratings tend to cluster throughout a players career and are predictive to a certain degree. Mixon throughout his career has been floating between "very bad" and "below average" for the most part when it comes to elusiveness.
Samaje Perine was slightly above average in 2022, scoring a 103.
I took it a little bit further and transformed it into a + stat. Baseball fans will be familiar with it, but I transformed the metric to have 100 reflect league average. 110 is good, 120 is great, 130 is amazing. Anything below 90 is really bad, and below 80 is legendarily bad. Mixon scored an 86. He was in the 10th percentile of all running backs with a minimum of 50 carries in 2022. The interesting thing is that these ratings tend to cluster throughout a players career and are predictive to a certain degree. Mixon throughout his career has been floating between "very bad" and "below average" for the most part when it comes to elusiveness.
Samaje Perine was slightly above average in 2022, scoring a 103.
