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
Projecting 2015 season
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: 612457"><p>Various sources are all over the board on their Cobb drop counts, so I'm not quite sure what to make of it. When looking at these "eye of the beholder" stats, I'm disinclined to embrace one over the other.</p><p></p><p>I'm assuming the 8.08% comes from PFF who had him for 125 targets per your earlier post. That would imply 10 drops. Why it's not 8.00% is peculiar. </p><p></p><p>sportingcharts.com had him for 6 drops on 127 targets for 4.7%, in the range of "good" and not something I'd mark him down for:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2014/" target="_blank">http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2014/</a></p><p></p><p>By comparison, sportingcharts had Nelson at 2.7%, using incorrect rounding...4/151 = 2.6490. His number should have been posted as 2.6%. PFF and sportingcharts seem to have some problems with elementary school math in their algorithms; that raises some questions for discussion at some other time about "black boxes" with minimal transparency. They have Beckham for 2 drops / 130 targets / 1.5%, an outstanding number. I would not consider Cobb having one additional drop every 4 games significant unless somebody can cite a game changer or two (I can't recall one) if Beckham hand none.</p><p></p><p>Interestingly, McGuin cites an entirely different set of numbers:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html" target="_blank">http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html</a></p><p></p><p>McGuin says Cobb had 9 drops on 145 targets for a 6.27% drop rate. (As an aside, there's more bad math here...it should be 6.21%...what is up with these guys?) He had Nelson for 9 drops on 163 targets for a 5.64% rate.</p><p>(Note 9/163 = 5.52%...what the h*ll?).</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html" target="_blank">http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html</a></p><p></p><p>Math issues aside, McGuin's target numbers are meaningfully higher than the other sources cited earlier in this thread. He does not say where he gets his numbers. In some other instances he has cited "Packer sources". That his numbers are the coaches' (or more likely a Packer quality control assistant's) is probably as good a guess as any. In any event, the disparity in targets indicates a quite different methodology at work than with other sources which makes comparisons with other methods problematic.</p><p></p><p>In short, there is so much inconsistency in the numbers from various sources that trusting one over the other without a lot more detail on the various methodologies proves problematic. They should all start by cleaning their 4th. grade math.</p><p></p><p>In any case, Rodgers throws bullets; receivers playing with QBs with less than elite arm strength might suffer in other categories, but drops is not one of them.</p><p></p><p>Yes it does. Without getting into the details, the data clearly indicates PFF's numbers include sack plays and those where the QB drops back and then runs.</p><p></p><p>Doesn't that strike you as a little bizarre? Receivers being penalized for a porous O-Line or QB's who extends plays past the LOS instead of behind it, or benefiting in the opposite instances?</p><p></p><p>In any case, disparities in yards gained per drop back among comparable receivers in other respects correlate to targets per drop back. For instance, Beckham had more yards per drop back than Cobb because he got more targets per drop back. As in the case of receiver-QB-rating over the QB's rating, this might say as much about the disparity of receiver talent within the team.</p><p></p><p>In this category, Dez Bryant should be the clear winner among those receivers who qualify for consideration. He netted 1320 yards while Cowboys threw a very low 476 times, while Romo had a couple of other outstanding options in Witten and Murray.</p><p></p><p>As we've dug into all of these receiver stats in great detail, I've come to the conclusion that the strongest argument against my awarding Cobb the "2014 most valuable receiver award" is Dez Bryant. The AP All Pro voters got that right.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 612457"] Various sources are all over the board on their Cobb drop counts, so I'm not quite sure what to make of it. When looking at these "eye of the beholder" stats, I'm disinclined to embrace one over the other. I'm assuming the 8.08% comes from PFF who had him for 125 targets per your earlier post. That would imply 10 drops. Why it's not 8.00% is peculiar. sportingcharts.com had him for 6 drops on 127 targets for 4.7%, in the range of "good" and not something I'd mark him down for: [URL]http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2014/[/URL] By comparison, sportingcharts had Nelson at 2.7%, using incorrect rounding...4/151 = 2.6490. His number should have been posted as 2.6%. PFF and sportingcharts seem to have some problems with elementary school math in their algorithms; that raises some questions for discussion at some other time about "black boxes" with minimal transparency. They have Beckham for 2 drops / 130 targets / 1.5%, an outstanding number. I would not consider Cobb having one additional drop every 4 games significant unless somebody can cite a game changer or two (I can't recall one) if Beckham hand none. Interestingly, McGuin cites an entirely different set of numbers: [URL]http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html[/URL] McGuin says Cobb had 9 drops on 145 targets for a 6.27% drop rate. (As an aside, there's more bad math here...it should be 6.21%...what is up with these guys?) He had Nelson for 9 drops on 163 targets for a 5.64% rate. (Note 9/163 = 5.52%...what the h*ll?). [URL]http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-have-options-if-randall-cobb-leaves-b99455123z1-294947891.html[/URL] Math issues aside, McGuin's target numbers are meaningfully higher than the other sources cited earlier in this thread. He does not say where he gets his numbers. In some other instances he has cited "Packer sources". That his numbers are the coaches' (or more likely a Packer quality control assistant's) is probably as good a guess as any. In any event, the disparity in targets indicates a quite different methodology at work than with other sources which makes comparisons with other methods problematic. In short, there is so much inconsistency in the numbers from various sources that trusting one over the other without a lot more detail on the various methodologies proves problematic. They should all start by cleaning their 4th. grade math. In any case, Rodgers throws bullets; receivers playing with QBs with less than elite arm strength might suffer in other categories, but drops is not one of them. Yes it does. Without getting into the details, the data clearly indicates PFF's numbers include sack plays and those where the QB drops back and then runs. Doesn't that strike you as a little bizarre? Receivers being penalized for a porous O-Line or QB's who extends plays past the LOS instead of behind it, or benefiting in the opposite instances? In any case, disparities in yards gained per drop back among comparable receivers in other respects correlate to targets per drop back. For instance, Beckham had more yards per drop back than Cobb because he got more targets per drop back. As in the case of receiver-QB-rating over the QB's rating, this might say as much about the disparity of receiver talent within the team. In this category, Dez Bryant should be the clear winner among those receivers who qualify for consideration. He netted 1320 yards while Cowboys threw a very low 476 times, while Romo had a couple of other outstanding options in Witten and Murray. As we've dug into all of these receiver stats in great detail, I've come to the conclusion that the strongest argument against my awarding Cobb the "2014 most valuable receiver award" is Dez Bryant. The AP All Pro voters got that right. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Pkrjones
Latest posts
NFC North Predictions
Latest: Pkrjones
2 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Voyageur
40 minutes ago
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
H
First Round Pick #23 - Matthew Golden WR - Texas
Latest: Heyjoe4
44 minutes ago
Draft Talk
H
Is it time?
Latest: Heyjoe4
54 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2025 NFL Schedule Release
Latest: milani
Today at 7:47 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Projecting 2015 season
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
