August 30th, 2011 — 11:04pm
4th and 2. Up 6. 2:08 remaining. Ball on your own 28. As a head coach, what do you do? More importantly, what process do you go through in order to make a decision.
Many of you will recognize the above situation: it is the famous 4th and 2 play from the 2009 game between the Patriots and Colts. I am not interested in discussing the validity of this particular decision as it has been dissected more than any other play of the past few years. Instead, I am simply going to use it as a lens to discuss how decisions should be made.
As a Colts fan, I debated the decision countless times (defending it). Many times, people would deride my use of “numbers” when I would lay out my argument. What they were really criticizing, however, were two very different things that many people often lump together and dismiss as “numbers”.
In decision-making, there are really two dimensions: (1) the first is defining the question you want answered and identifying the parameters that you’ll need in order to answer it and (2) the other is using statistics to estimate the unknown variables in that resulting equation. As I’ll show, criticism of the latter can be valid and depends heavily on the situation, but the former is not debatable but an indisputable truth.
Continue reading »
2 comments » | decision making, Football
August 7th, 2011 — 10:32pm
Neil Paine over at the PFR blog wrote basically what I was going to follow up with (albeit much better than I would have). I just wanted to add in a couple other correlations with current metrics that I looked at (correlations are for all stats from 2008-2010).
|EPA per Play||0.924
|WPA per Play||0.899
|WPA per Game||0.892
All the EPA and WPA metrics are from Advanced NFL Stats (leaderboard here, if you don’t know what they mean check out my last post). As you can tell, EPA per Play correlates best with Total QBR, and is on par with VOA according to Neil’s article. This makes sense: the way QBR handles Clutch Index–first multiplying by it, then dividing by the sum of it–essentially cancels it out, leaving us with EPA per play and the division of credit. The Clutch Index serves to reward QBs who make their best plays in relatively clutch situations, but this appears to be minimal.
Whether or not QBR turns out to be more useful than EPA per Play or VOA probably lies in how well the division of credit is handled. At one extreme, it could be the next step in advancing QB metrics, rewarding those QBs who can get the ball downfield and put the ball on the money while punishing those who don’t. On the other end of the spectrum, if not handled correctly, it could end up adding unneeded complexity and throwing out useful information. As of now, we have no way of assessing which it will be as ESPN has yet to release any details on how their division of credit is handled. Let’s hope we can get a peek inside at some point and see exactly what’s going on.
Comment » | Football, player evaluation, Quick Slant, review
August 4th, 2011 — 11:27pm
Earlier today, ESPN released (some) details of their brand new rating system for quarterbacks dubbed Total Quarterback Rating, or Total QBR (or even further abbreviated, just QBR), aimed at replacing the popular yet flawed Passer Rating. So what is it? And is it a worthy replacement?
To answer that question, let’s first take a look at what is currently out there, which will let us compare Total QBR and pinpoint the major differences.
Continue reading »
Comment » | descriptive, Football, player evaluation, review