Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Training Camp - What I'm Watching For
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 505808"><p>It's not a matter of "taste" and I've made no assumptions on that matter. If you can show me how PFF determines what a "pressure" is, the guidelines used making these judgement calls, and the quality controls assuring the guidelines are followed, I'd be happy to see it.</p><p> </p><p>If there's any assumption being made it's these subjective stats purveyors MUST be doing it right otherwise Peter King or agents or whoever would not be quoting them. Big echo chambers built on sand are not that uncommon. Should I talk about Wall Street risk modeling after all? A key risk modeling tool widely used on Wall Street before the calamity was developed by Morgan Stanley and subsequent shared with fellow firms...oh, never mind.</p><p> </p><p>I never said "pressures" as presented by PFF is a "worthless" stat. I said it is suspect. You don't really know what you're looking at. If you want to take it on faith that's your business. I would point out that the only way you could identify flaws in a government statistic is by knowing how that statistic is calculated, which you can know because it is publicly available. See the point here?</p><p> </p><p>I mentioned "consequential" pressures to make the point that if you're going to all that trouble to stat-ify (to coin a term) subjective things requiring judgments, you might as well measure things that matter. I was making a multi-level argument, despite your annoyance. Meaningful football stats are based on outcomes. If that were not the case, we might as well add dropped balls into the QB's completion total with an estimate of forgone yards gained.</p><p> </p><p>Yes, STATS tracks pressures just as PPF does. They both think it's important but they cannot agree on what a on the numbers which suggests there are disparities in the definition or applicaiton. You see this particularly in something as simple as "drop" stats where there are meaningful disparities between the two.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 505808"] It's not a matter of "taste" and I've made no assumptions on that matter. If you can show me how PFF determines what a "pressure" is, the guidelines used making these judgement calls, and the quality controls assuring the guidelines are followed, I'd be happy to see it. If there's any assumption being made it's these subjective stats purveyors MUST be doing it right otherwise Peter King or agents or whoever would not be quoting them. Big echo chambers built on sand are not that uncommon. Should I talk about Wall Street risk modeling after all? A key risk modeling tool widely used on Wall Street before the calamity was developed by Morgan Stanley and subsequent shared with fellow firms...oh, never mind. I never said "pressures" as presented by PFF is a "worthless" stat. I said it is suspect. You don't really know what you're looking at. If you want to take it on faith that's your business. I would point out that the only way you could identify flaws in a government statistic is by knowing how that statistic is calculated, which you can know because it is publicly available. See the point here? I mentioned "consequential" pressures to make the point that if you're going to all that trouble to stat-ify (to coin a term) subjective things requiring judgments, you might as well measure things that matter. I was making a multi-level argument, despite your annoyance. Meaningful football stats are based on outcomes. If that were not the case, we might as well add dropped balls into the QB's completion total with an estimate of forgone yards gained. Yes, STATS tracks pressures just as PPF does. They both think it's important but they cannot agree on what a on the numbers which suggests there are disparities in the definition or applicaiton. You see this particularly in something as simple as "drop" stats where there are meaningful disparities between the two. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Zad Fnark
Latest posts
Moving Up
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 3:50 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 3:45 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: El Guapo
Yesterday at 10:37 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Backed Into A Corner?
Latest: El Guapo
Yesterday at 10:18 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
P
Assessing the Draft Class (2024)
Latest: Packer Fan in SD
Yesterday at 8:54 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Training Camp - What I'm Watching For
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top