Is B Marshall in the conversation for the best receiver in the NFL in 2015

[hawk]

No. No he is not. Not sure I would even consider him for top 10. Decker is having a better season than Marshall.

Explain please...

[Long Island Leprechaun]

 

Uh, what? This is not an acknowledgement:

 

Nor is this:

It's actually a horrible misinterpretation of not only their methodology, but advanced analytics in general, and it's pretty obvious that you don't know what you're talking about. The very idea that you think their numbers say this...

 

...means you're completely clueless as to what their analytics measure. That's not what their numbers say at all, and almost all of the questions that you have about their methodology are actually answered in the extended FAQ, a section which you attempted to pompously accuse me of not reading when you clearly haven't.

And even with that, all fine and excusable, but you don't get to barge into a thread like a douchebag with a post like this:

...and not expect to get held accountable.

You are wrong, and not only are you wrong but you lied. You flat out made something up in an effort to try and put another person down and make them feel inadequate. Perhaps next time you're better off keeping your mouth shut.

Oh please, now who's being arrogant. I stand by my assessment, and it's pretty simple to state why. FO analysis is based on situational analysis that is totally driven by value to obtaining points and wins. That works well for teams, although it is less effective for assessing wins for the obvious reason that the season has too few games to be statistically robust. When it comes to assessing individual players, it's completely scrambled eggs. Assessing the value of a WR's catch based on how it furthered points scored misses what most people actually value in a player's performance -- or for that matter what most players would value -- how well did the player succeed in completing the task given to him. We all laugh at the Schotty play calls for six yards on a third and eight. Penalizing the player who completes the play as called is not accurate or helpful. As a team event, it's of low value. It doesn't tell us about the player's actual performance or effectiveness. Suppose in addition, to complete the above play the player had to snatch the ball thrown behind him in traffic to make a completion. Most of us would consider that a fine play and give the receiver a solid mark for their effort and skill. But FO analysis is not focused on that. Here's their comments on individual performance:

Football is a game in which nearly every action requires the work of two or more teammates -- in fact, usually 11 teammates all working in unison. 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%."

Even DVOA is as a statistical average over season. As I said above, FO  is solid in assessing team performance. Because teams are indeed driven by points and wins. Trying to drill those targets down to specific players and judging their performance is simply inadequate. Worse, it's not predictive when scaled back up to team outcome.

I will add that I've bought the FO almanacs over several seasons and have enjoyed reading their articles focused on some specific variable. It's interesting to read, but it is far from its equivalent in baseball. Even baseball sabermetrics are limited. Try to find a formula that holds up to show high strength of correlation of events even to runs. You get reasonable correlations but not at the level you'd want for predictive value. Trying that with football is impossible.

With that said, it's a serious mistake to jump from the FO value rating to the comment below. That is a serious misreading and misuse of FO, one you agreed with while adding some personal dislike for Marshall as somehow relevant to the discussion. It wasn't.

No. No he is not. Not sure I would even consider him for top 10. Decker is having a better season than Marshall.

[Matt39]

Happy learned how to putt.

[Matt39]

Oh please, now who's being arrogant. I stand by my assessment, and it's pretty simple to state why. FO analysis is based on situational analysis that is totally driven by value to obtaining points and wins. That works well for teams, although it is less effective for assessing wins for the obvious reason that the season has too few games to be statistically robust. When it comes to assessing individual players, it's completely scrambled eggs. Assessing the value of a WR's catch based on how it furthered points scored misses what most people actually value in a player's performance -- or for that matter what most players would value -- how well did the player succeed in completing the task given to him. We all laugh at the Schotty play calls for six yards on a third and eight. Penalizing the player who completes the play as called is not accurate or helpful. As a team event, it's of low value. It doesn't tell us about the player's actual performance or effectiveness. Suppose in addition, to complete the above play the player had to snatch the ball thrown behind him in traffic to make a completion. Most of us would consider that a fine play and give the receiver a solid mark for their effort and skill. But FO analysis is not focused on that. Here's their comments on individual performance:

Football is a game in which nearly every action requires the work of two or more teammates -- in fact, usually 11 teammates all working in unison. 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%."

Even DVOA is as a statistical average over season. As I said above, FO  is solid in assessing team performance. Because teams are indeed driven by points and wins. Trying to drill those targets down to specific players and judging their performance is simply inadequate. Worse, it's not predictive when scaled back up to team outcome.

I will add that I've bought the FO almanacs over several seasons and have enjoyed reading their articles focused on some specific variable. It's interesting to read, but it is far from its equivalent in baseball. Even baseball sabermetrics are limited. Try to find a formula that holds up to show high strength of correlation of events even to runs. You get reasonable correlations but not at the level you'd want for predictive value. Trying that with football is impossible.

With that said, it's a serious mistake to jump from the FO value rating to the comment below. That is a serious misreading and misuse of FO, one you agreed with while adding some personal dislike for Marshall as somehow relevant to the discussion. It wasn't.

No. No he is not. Not sure I would even consider him for top 10. Decker is having a better season than Marshall.