Finally getting some legitimate analysis of Kirkpatrick's play in '15

[*bfine32*]

(08-04-2016, 10:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So lame.

Pointing out hoiw stupid it is to judge a CB by interceptions is not talking out of both sides of my mouth.  It is nothing mnore than looking at how valid certain stats are at measuring a players ability.

Instead you are the one showing how little you know about statistocal analysis by trying to discredit any stat that requires a "formula".  Sounds like you only judge players by raw stats instead of the more precise metrics like "pass efficiency", "yards per carry", and others.

One person has harped on INTs in this thread and that is you. Why do you make up something that someone has said and then try to point out how silly it is? You praised a site because they used stats, so I suggested we use stats. 

You praised a site for using stats, yet they put Dre in the top 20 because they do this:

Quote:We will be looking at plays where the cornerback was the primary defender in coverage, leaving out a few types of plays that do not properly reflect a cornerback's ability. These omitted plays include screens, balls tipped at the line or thrown away, Hail Marys, and plays where the quarterback was hit while throwing the ball. Defensive pass interference is included, but we ignore other defensive penalties that occur away from the pass. The "possible targets" from estimated target rate leave out the aforementioned omitted plays in addition to passes that were marked as "uncovered" or "blown coverage." However, if a play was marked as "hole in zone," the pass play was included.

Quote:Cornerback statistics are traditionally very volatile from year to year, and the best cornerbacks will often have worse results than expected because quarterbacks will be unlikely to target them unless they have already made a mistake. Seventy-five players met the benchmark of either starting eight games or facing 50 passes to be included in the list. It is important to note that with the number of players ranked, the difference between ranking 50th and 60th is not all that large, and therefore is not necessarily an indicator of a huge gap in talent.
We did change the way we did adjustments this year, in an attempt to partially solve the past problem where nickelbacks often ranked much higher than expected in these metrics. In the past, adjustments for offensive Team X were done by comparing Team X's No. 1 receiver to all No. 1 receivers, Team X's No. 2 receiver to all No. 2 receivers, and Team X's other receivers to all "other" receivers. In 2015, we adjusted instead by comparing Team X's No. 1 receiver to ALL wide receivers around the league. We hope this does a little bit more to penalize cornerbacks who cover nothing but slot receivers and boost the adjustments for cornerbacks who primarily cover No. 1 receivers.
First, we will look at best players by adjusted yards per pass allowed.

(perhaps just a tad more complicated than taking yards and dividing by carries to obtain YPC, but you knew this, you're just trying real hard)



Yep, this is legit analysis; yet PFF (a sight that over 1/2/the NFL teams pay a premium to access) is faulty.


Why, because Fred says so and anyone that disagrees doesn't understand statistical analysis.


F.O. lists Dre as a mediocre starting CB, because for some warped reason they give him added points for not playing the slot. Roll with that if you want. There's one dude in this thread that is buying it.