CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yeah, there are a ton of rich people running around these days who got their gambling because they pat attention to Football Outsiders...lol. The article is a joke, just like your love for data thinking it actually shows up on the Football field. There is a reason why dropped INT's, dont show up on anyone stats. Why's that smart guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yeah, there are a ton of rich people running around these days who got their gambling because they pat attention to Football Outsiders...lol. Yo-ho Lord Helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yo-ho Lord Helmet. there actually are sharps who use it. I've ntoiced a lot when there's RLM, the FO data differs greatly from the real line in the same direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 there actually are sharps who use it. I've ntoiced a lot when there's RLM, the FO data differs greatly from the real line in the same direction Absolutely. Being that Vegas uses none of it to determine the spreads, it's been an ace in the hole for me a bunch of times. Made a nice chunk of change off the GB/Chi and Chi/Sea games off of tracking the non-adjusted numbers almost exclusively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgb Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 last year we didn't deserve it because the bungles and colts rolled over and people missed some FGs against us in the playoffs. this year we didn't deserve it because sanchez led the league in almost-ints. when you talk a big game and then actually deliver on (most) of your boasts, you're going to have a target on your back. how many articles were written about how much other coaches hated rich kotite's big mouth ala Tony Dungy to Rex? zero. embrace the haters, no one hates a loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 last year we didn't deserve it because the bungles and colts rolled over and people missed some FGs against us in the playoffs. this year we didn't deserve it because sanchez led the league in almost-ints. when you talk a big game and then actually deliver on (most) of your boasts, you're going to have a target on your back. how many articles were written about how much other coaches hated rich kotite's big mouth ala Tony Dungy to Rex? zero. embrace the haters, no one hates a loser. So the Jets lost because Rex Ryan isn't afraid to share his honest opinion with the media when asked for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Dont insult Football Outsiders, Aten, Dbastesman and CTM will castrate you. Rather not get involved in this one. The Luddites have all staked out their little holes in the sand. Pulling them out would just get me labeled a pseudo-intellectual again, and there's only so much abuse my psyche can take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 1. How many times do you need to be told that they didn't lose a 1st round pick or get the largest fine in NFL history for filming from the wrong part of the field. They were punished for filming other teams' coaches sending in signals. 2. I've always wondered why Pats fans laud Bill Belichick as a football "genius" yet when it comes to this one particular subject they seem to all know much more than him because he obviously felt he gained a significant advantage because he did it for the better part of a decade. So unless you know something Bill Belichick doesn't, which means he is a moron who doesn't know dick about football, you're wrong. How did you get that from what I said? BB will try to get whatever advantage he can - significant or not. The difference in opinion here is the significance of the act, Zippy. Sargent Goodell (a former Jets employee, I may add) wanted to put BB (arrogant SOB) in his place and send a message to the entire league. Mission accomplished. If for no other reason, I hope the players "win" in court (or wherever) because it would be a the kick in the azz Sargent Goodell so greatly deserves. Cares about player saftey, yet wants an 18 game season - compassionate my azz.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Rather not get involved in this one. The Luddites have all staked out their little holes in the sand. Pulling them out would just get me labeled a pseudo-intellectual again, and there's only so much abuse my psyche can take. BTW, you know who had a great year now that I'm looking at the numbers? Carson Palmer. 6th in the league in yards! Man, what a baller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Next year he is going to set the record for dropped interceptions for a super bowl winning QB. Let's just hope opposing teams don't catch on and stat putting 17 year old girls in their secondary. They will have no problem holding onto his balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Rather not get involved in this one. The Luddites have all staked out their little holes in the sand. Pulling them out would just get me labeled a pseudo-intellectual again, and there's only so much abuse my psyche can take. FTR, I've previously recanted my anti-FO position and have seen the light. In the right hands, it's a good tool. Graham does not represent those hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 FTR, I've previously recanted my anti-FO position and have seen the light. In the right hands, it's a good tool. Graham does not represent those hands. Sperm kind of took a sh*t on the whole catch percentage thing though if memory serves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 FTR, I've previously recanted my anti-FO position and have seen the light. In the right hands, it's a good tool. Graham does not represent those hands. Graham's a dunce but I have yet to hear a legitimate argument against the validity of the stat itself. Let's just hope opposing teams don't catch on and stat putting 17 year old girls in their secondary. They will have no problem holding onto his balls. I lol'd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Maybe Mark just throws a nearly uncatchable ball. He had to be way up there in drops, period. Schottenheimer seemed to learn a little bit, and get Sanchez some easier throws earlier in games - which I thought helped his accuracy. His numbers improved after back--to-back disasters against NE and Miami. Plus the guy's in his second year, and his career postseason numbers are 95/157 with 1155 yards, 9 TD's, 3 ints, for a passer rating of 94.3 (and a 4-2 record, all on the road) in six games. Guy ****in' sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Maybe Mark just throws a nearly uncatchable ball. He had to be way up there in drops, period. Schottenheimer seemed to learn a little bit, and get Sanchez some easier throws earlier in games - which I thought helped his accuracy. His numbers improved after back--to-back disasters against NE and Miami. Plus the guy's in his second year, and his career postseason numbers are 95/157 with 1155 yards, 9 TD's, 3 ints, for a passer rating of 94.3 (and a 4-2 record, all on the road) in six games. Guy ****in' sucks. If I was a 17 year old hot chick I would body slam you right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgb Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So the Jets lost because Rex Ryan isn't afraid to share his honest opinion with the media when asked for it? talk about utterly missing my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Without discussing the merits of this article, I just wanted to point out that Lewin was not unkind to Sanchez at all, as he had him as the #1 rated QB in that draft - and by doing so, ignored one of the two criteria that is the basis of his career forecaster. http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70191-rotoworldlewin-qb-draft-preview/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoicsentry Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I don't trust statistics like this. It may very well be accurate, but with such a statistical variance, it's hard to attribute to luck. Most likely, there's some explanation for why he's throwing more near picks that are tough to handle. The first thing that comes to mind is that he puts too much zip on the ball, especially in the early goings. I think everyone sees that. That is a recipe for more picks but *specifically* that's a recipe for more NEAR picks that aren't actually picked: when he misfires, given the WAY that he misfires, no one is likely to hold on to the ball. So what that means is his bad passes may get more contact with defenders, but not more of the "good" contact required to actually register a pick. Thus, it is irrelevant. Another idea: he gets a lot of passes knocked at the line. That's not a good thing, but those kinds of passes are unlikely to be intercepted even if defenders make some contact. The ball hits a defender in the hands and gets deflected backwards in the air to no man's land. Just a couple thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Why's that smart guy? What qualifies as dropped INT is up for interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 What qualifies as dropped INT is up for interpretation. Correct. However when you've defined exactly what constitutes a dropped INT for the purpose of the study, it really isn't in context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Without discussing the merits of this article, I just wanted to point out that Lewin was not unkind to Sanchez at all, as he had him as the #1 rated QB in that draft - and by doing so, ignored one of the two criteria that is the basis of his career forecaster. http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70191-rotoworldlewin-qb-draft-preview/ Those articles are so weird. Either Lewin's so dumb as to misconstrue the system's blunt-instrument utility, or he's so pompous as to think his own half-baked observations can transcend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Correct. However when you've defined exactly what constitutes a dropped INT for the purpose of the study, it really isn't in context. It absolutely still is up for interpretation. The definition as outlined in the article is not absolute and there are circumstances where passes they might disqualify based on the definition were more catchable or more specifically the defender was actually attempting a pick by diving after a ball and couldn't hold on, than ones outlined by the definition or more specifically a play where the defender was simply playing to knock the ball down but could have picked it off had he been thinking that way. Just because a ball could have been intercepted doesn't mean it would have been under any circumstances, so to define anything as a "dropped interception" is specious at best and moronically assumptive at worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Correct. However when you've defined exactly what constitutes a dropped INT for the purpose of the study, it really isn't in context. Football Outsiders' criteria to determine a drop: "We don't mean a defender sort of near the play, or guys who dive and see interceptions go off their fingertips. We mean guys who dropped balls that hit them right in the hands or chest." I mean, they are a defender. They dont exactly know when it coming or expect balls to hit them in the hands or thrown at their chest. You dont know how long they even saw the ball. They might have looked back seen it for one second, and it was already on their chest. Its like saying a big guy in the NBA sucks because he cant pass and get assists. Its not what they are asked to do, its not what they are good at doing. Thats my point. Its why those stats for a defender is a ball deflected and not a dropped INT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 What qualifies as dropped INT is up for interpretation. Are errors in baseball up for interpretation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Are errors in baseball up for interpretation? For the most part, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 For the most part, no. They most certainly are. Scorers judgement which is subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Are errors in baseball up for interpretation? So you're argument back to me is to list a stat, that is tracked, because its technically open for interpretation? I guess that would make sense if dropped INT's were tracked. Otherwise, I dont see your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Football Outsiders' criteria to determine a drop: "We don't mean a defender sort of near the play, or guys who dive and see interceptions go off their fingertips. We mean guys who dropped balls that hit them right in the hands or chest." I mean, they are a defender. They dont exactly know when it coming or expect balls to hit them in the hands or thrown at their chest. You dont know how long they even saw the ball. They might have looked back seen it for one second, and it was already on their chest. Its like saying a big guy in the NBA sucks because he cant pass and get assists. Its not what they are asked to do, its not what they are good at doing. Thats my point. Its why those stats for a defender is a ball deflected and not a dropped INT. No, that's my point. Pointing out hypothetical loopholes doesn't dismiss a statistic, especially when its only competition are conventional stats. Everyone in here knows damn well that Eli Manning wasn't a top 5 quarterback last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So you're argument back to me is to list a stat, that is tracked, because its technically open for interpretation? I guess that would make sense if dropped INT's were tracked. Otherwise, I dont see your point. But they are tracked, just not by the nfl, which makes almost no attempt to track anything beyond superficial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 They most certainly are. Scorers judgement which is subjective. A SS throws the ball into the stands - error. A 3B completely boots a grounder - error. A LF - literally drops a fly ball - error. The majority of errors are pretty clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 A SS throws the ball into the stands - error. A 3B completely boots a grounder - error. A LF - literally drops a fly ball - error. The majority of errors are pretty clear. as are the majority od dropped passes / dropped ints Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I guess that would make sense if dropped INT's were tracked. What does this even mean? The fact that the NFL didn't track individual sack leaders until 1982 doesn't diminish Deacon Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 What does this even mean? The fact that the NFL didn't track individual sack leaders until 1982 doesn't diminish Deacon Jones. dude has 0 career sacks.. wtf is he even doing in the hall brah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 No, that's my point. Pointing out hypothetical loopholes doesn't dismiss a statistic, especially when its only competition are conventional stats. Everyone in here knows damn well that Eli Manning wasn't a top 5 quarterback last season. True, but its not like their sh*t the gospel. They have just as many flawed predictions. But they are tracked, just not by the nfl, which makes almost no attempt to track anything beyond superficial So then its not official. This is kind of useless argument and I'm pretty much over it already, but the article/stat is stupid because so many factors come into play. What if it was after a big penalty that negated a first? That attempt may have never happened. What if it was directly after a dropped pass by a WR, that would have been a first. That attempt may have never happened. What if the defender just covered a WR on 3 go routes and was gassed but couldnt come out because we were in a hurry up? I could keep going but I'm over it because I dont see the point in arguing something that almost happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 What does this even mean? The fact that the NFL didn't track individual sack leaders until 1982 doesn't diminish Deacon Jones. It's hurt Joe Klecko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.