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
Josh Jones at ILB?
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: 726754"><p>That may be true on a subjective basis when compiling their All Pro list or the like. But there's no evidence it is included in their numerical ratings. Why not quantify such important aspects of pass rusher performance? Leaving them out of the equation is highly distorting.</p><p></p><p>That sounds about right. There were 1120 sacks last season, so about 1 out of 13 sacks results in a turnover. Under PFF's 1.00 : 0.75 sack:hurry scoring ratio, do you think 1 out of 17 hurries results in an INT? I sure don't. And that does not even take into account the lost yards with the other sacks vs. zero lost on an hurry incompletions.</p><p></p><p>For like the upmteenth time, "pressures" include sacks. You meant "hurries". Or maybe hurries and hits. I like hits myself.</p><p></p><p>I do not ignore their relevance. A hurry is better than having the QB sit back in his rocking chair and throw at his leisure, and if the player scores a hit to the QB's arm or his hand, or if he knocks the QB down as he throws, all the better.</p><p></p><p>What I questioned and continue to question is that a hurry is worth 0.75 sacks as PFF uses in their formula. Hits = hurries is also quite suspect. You seemed to agree, at least on the sack:hurry ratio.</p><p></p><p>I'd go a step further and say PFF's formula construction has evidence of arbitrariness and is not based on any kind deep look at the value of outcomes. The round numbers are a giveaway as I said before. It would seem they have a lot of guys who focus on individual play performance but are light on guys who can build a rating model based on the value of relative outcomes. They're using Kentucky windage in those ratios. The shame of it is they probably have all of the raw data but nobody who knows how to refine the formula.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 726754"] That may be true on a subjective basis when compiling their All Pro list or the like. But there's no evidence it is included in their numerical ratings. Why not quantify such important aspects of pass rusher performance? Leaving them out of the equation is highly distorting. That sounds about right. There were 1120 sacks last season, so about 1 out of 13 sacks results in a turnover. Under PFF's 1.00 : 0.75 sack:hurry scoring ratio, do you think 1 out of 17 hurries results in an INT? I sure don't. And that does not even take into account the lost yards with the other sacks vs. zero lost on an hurry incompletions. For like the upmteenth time, "pressures" include sacks. You meant "hurries". Or maybe hurries and hits. I like hits myself. I do not ignore their relevance. A hurry is better than having the QB sit back in his rocking chair and throw at his leisure, and if the player scores a hit to the QB's arm or his hand, or if he knocks the QB down as he throws, all the better. What I questioned and continue to question is that a hurry is worth 0.75 sacks as PFF uses in their formula. Hits = hurries is also quite suspect. You seemed to agree, at least on the sack:hurry ratio. I'd go a step further and say PFF's formula construction has evidence of arbitrariness and is not based on any kind deep look at the value of outcomes. The round numbers are a giveaway as I said before. It would seem they have a lot of guys who focus on individual play performance but are light on guys who can build a rating model based on the value of relative outcomes. They're using Kentucky windage in those ratios. The shame of it is they probably have all of the raw data but nobody who knows how to refine the formula. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
PackerDNA
sschind
King of Jeans
XPack
Latest posts
S
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Schultz
42 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 12:58 AM
Draft Talk
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 10:38 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
Yesterday at 10:05 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 10:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jones at ILB?
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