11-19-2009, 04:44 PM | #1216 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
You can already judge a quarterback by his YPA figure. If Brett Favre has a career YPA of 7.0 (which he does), and 9565 attempts (which he does), then you can already predict his TD total using a simple regression with that information. Now, it turns out that Favre has a career TD rate of 5.0 which is better than roughly 64% of quarterbacks who played over the exact same timeframe as Brett Favre. So, unsurprisingly, Favre is a more valuable player than a hypothetical player who played over the exact same timeframe and threw the same # of passes for the same number of yards. We can all agree that Vinny Testaverde is not the same as Brett Favre, even though he played over the same timeframe, and had similar attempt and YPA numbers up through 2002. The 10 marginal yards comes from the assumption that you can already account for passing yards by looking at passing yards, but you're trying to determine how valuable that one yard between the one yard line and the goal line is relative to the rest of the field. I think PFR's analysis falls apart a bit because a TD pass off of play action from the one might actually only be worth ten yards of field position (of course, the same pass on third down might be worth three times as much as a one-yard TD pass on first down), while a TD strike from the 25 yard line might be a passing play that would have gone for 40 or 45 yards if the endzone hadn't truncated the play. I happen to think the 20 yard estimate is a lot closer to the true value of the average TD. But, admittedly, that's based on "feel" and not a lot of evidence. If we establish the value of the average INT = 45 yards, it's tough to say that the last yard between the one yard line and the end zone should be considered equivelent. We know that it's greater than one yard...it's the toughest yard to get. The major key is to seperate "passing touchdown" from "offensive touchdown". I'm going to add on to this post later, but right now, I'm changing locations.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
Advertisements |
11-19-2009, 04:50 PM | #1217 |
MVP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 63
Posts: 10,672
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
this is over analysis to the nth degree. gtripp, right now, do YOU bring Campbell back?
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan |
11-19-2009, 05:02 PM | #1218 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Age: 41
Posts: 3,238
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
all i know is jc doesn't throw very many int's he is actually very good about that over the years, but at the same time his td totals are pedestrian, while an int is never good i'd take an int a game if he could throw two td's, because i feel with thoose odds we would win.
if you throw more deeper passes and take chances you have more of a chance of throwing a int, but if you have a good qb you also have a better chance of throw a td and as far as saying farve doesn't deserve to be in the hall because of his int's thats insane, if you average out his totals he averages 18 a season and he has had some bad seasons but he has also had some great seasons. as a qb you have to take risks, you just have to know when and where, jc never does not to moention he is in accurate as hell, he could serve a great role as a back up here and i hope he stays here for that purpose
__________________
"I don't think anybody should have regrets, especially me, ... You don't regret what you do in your life. If you do it, you do it for a reason." ST21 |
11-19-2009, 05:09 PM | #1219 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Given, however, the sorry state of our QB situation independent of Campbell, I'd say you'd have to. Thing is, if things fall in such a way so that Campbell is an unrestricted free agent, he's almost certainly worth less to us than he is to a team that needs a quarterback but has other offensive pieces in place. Seattle, St. Louis, Arizona, Minnesota, Oakland, etc. And if he doesn't hit the open market, the only reason you wouldn't bring him back is pure spite. Since a good organization doesn't make decisions based on emotion, it would be an obvious yes, and then the new coaching staff gets to determine who holds the clipboard.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
11-19-2009, 05:18 PM | #1220 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 60
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
I take it the "JC has good stats" people aren't very interested in discussing the strength of the opponents he compiled the stats against, or the simple observations of JC's poor fundamentals...
|
11-19-2009, 05:26 PM | #1221 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,384
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
With JC you have a qb who has inherent flaws, but enough positives to have given him a shot. For the question, is he the qb next year. I say put a 2nd round tender on him - which is an acknowledgment he did not live up to expectations or potential - and if no one takes it bring him back for training camp, cut Collins and have an open competition in camp. Let someone else take the job from him. |
|
11-19-2009, 05:33 PM | #1222 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Age: 41
Posts: 3,238
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
i really don't understand how anyone can say he is a great qb, or anyone that can say he is a terrible qb, imo there is no way to justify either of those comments.
bottom line he is a great game managing qb, he can come in and not lose you a game, and as of right now he is the best option we have and i think he will most likly be the best option next year, atleast in the begining but like you said it needs to be an open competition where no ones job is safe
__________________
"I don't think anybody should have regrets, especially me, ... You don't regret what you do in your life. If you do it, you do it for a reason." ST21 |
11-19-2009, 05:36 PM | #1223 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Let's look at Portis' 79 yard run from the Chiefs game. He got tackled 10 yards short of the end zone. The difference in value between that 79 yard run and an 89 yd TD run is more than "ten yards", as we ended up not scoring on the drive. But let's assume for a minute that we establish that 1 TD = 1 INT = 45 yards. Applied to the Portis run, the difference between the 79 yard run and a 89 yard TD run would be the same as the difference between the 79 yard run and a 24 yard run (=79-10-45) out to the WAS 34. While I firmly believe that Portis really should have been able to run that in for a touchdown, I would not trade in the the play that occured for a 50% probability of a score combined with a 50% that Brandon Carr gets off the Randle El block and tackles Portis for a 24 yard gain. I would however, certainly trade in that 79 yard run if that 50% probability that Portis gets dragged down at the 30 or 35 of KC (70-10-10 or 15). That's all I think the valuation game really is. A whole lot of trial and error, and what "feels" right. If the PFR analysis falls short, it's because they are only trying to value first down situations, when they need to be looking at all downs. A TD bonus on 3rd and goal from the 15 yard line probably is worth close to 45 yards. I would definately trade 45 yards of field position for the four additional points.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
11-19-2009, 10:19 PM | #1224 |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
I would have much rather seen Campbell go deep into the end zone and possibly get intercepted at the end of the Lions game than the little flare to Betts (or whoever) that we saw. If that makes Campbell a bad QB so what.
But anyway, not even all INTs are the same. An INT returned for a TD is significantly more important than a INT with a 14 point lead and no time left on the clock. Intercepting the ball on 4th and 4 is probably worth less than just letting the ball drop and so on.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
11-20-2009, 01:22 AM | #1225 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 60
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
My argument is that his statistics so far this season shouldn't be used to support a pro-campbell argument that flies in the face of reality (i.e. that he's played great football because his QB rating is good despite looking awful in games against bad teams).
I won't disagree with anyone that wants to backtrack into a "hey there are worse QB's than JC" stance. I'm interested in debating the merits of those stats that supposedly "don't lie" that are repeatedly being used in this thread to "put down" people who are unhappy with JC's play. Are you really going to stand by the idea that he has improved from last year to this year based on statistics that were compiled against the weakest half of a season schedule in the history of the NFL? |
11-20-2009, 03:42 AM | #1226 | |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 25
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Me personally I'm not a stats person, but I'm a results person. I could care less about good stats or bad stats. My question is did you get a W. When we look at overall results and we determine they're not good then we need to look at stats and try to determine if the stats reinforce the outcome of the bad results. In other words does JC's stats indicate that he holds a major responsibility in the bad 3-6 results we have. If you do an honest assesment the answer is NO! JC is a good QB and will be a good QB in the future. JC is not the single reason the Skins are loosing games. JC is not the best QB in the league, but he's deffinitely not the worst. The fans that claim he sucks won't realize what we have until he's gone. These are the same fans that think Cutler the other JC was the answer. Talk about a guy with no leadership, he never won anything in his football career. At least JC lead his high school and college teams to championships, but you all want Cultler. |
|
11-20-2009, 03:47 PM | #1227 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 60
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
The key thing is not for the Skins to pull JC because he's not 'mediocre' enough on a consistent basis, it's to start planing on who to replace him with because he's not 'franchise' enough. There are plenty of middling game managers who can play consistently unspectacular football. Hell one of them is backing up JC every game, and at times has looked better than Campbell. We didn't trade up to draft a mediocre game manager in the first round, and at this point he's not even at that level (consistently). Fair or not JC will be judged on that basis, as a top draft pick who needs to be a franchise QB to be considered successful here... Holding him to a whole other (lower) standard and then saying his stats don't lie, seems to be the product of fans who are maybe too emotionally invested in Campbell and can't see the reality, or perhaps don't have access to the games to actually see his play. |
|
11-22-2009, 05:09 PM | #1228 |
The Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Best game Campbell has played this year by far. Numbers might not say that, but he played well today, especially considering the pressure.
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do. |
11-22-2009, 05:21 PM | #1229 |
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brazil, IN
Age: 54
Posts: 883
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
After today I say he stay another year. Question is do we bring in someone else or do we keep Brennan close by to be a possibility to be a starter. But man do we need to improve or O line.
__________________
HTTR! |
11-22-2009, 05:27 PM | #1230 |
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,544
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
yes sir i agree
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|