![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#11 | ||
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
|
Re: Updated: Hightower Torn ACL/Moss Out 5-7 Weeks
Quote:
Descriptive statistics can be used to form ballpark estimates on data. This "guessing" is done by analysts for many more important things than football, biology and finance being two of the subjects that employ such things. I may not know exact values of the stats, but I can try to make a guess that is close. Beck has had 2 years to learn the offense but he had absolutely no data whatsoever to form any projections "stat-based" projections. The only projections that could be made for John Beck is from empirical analysis, aka looking at tape, and even that was limited. T.O, on the other hand, has data to work with. My high prediction on his performance is not far off from the average of his touchdowns(approximately 5) and yards(approximately 62) for the past three years. The standard deviation for his yards is 9.59. Most likely, he will contribute anywhere between 820 yards and 420 yards, and between 2 to 8 touchdowns. So, far this is all just basic statistics. Now, one can delve even further and look into aspects of T.O's game to further narrow that range on what could be his "real" production here, but you can get some sense on what T.O's "outer limits" of production are. Then, the matter is about whether it's worth getting this kind of production over banking on unknowns that have no data to hint either way on how they are going to play both in the present and the future. Leonard Hankerson has done nothing, hence no descriptive statistics can be used for analysis on what he might do production-wise. My point is why he is on the roster despite his giant goose-egg, and why he and every other prospect deserves a roster spot for US over a hedge like T.O. He is only on the roster because there's a small chance(VERY SMALL) he can provide a 7000+ yards in 7 years and provide many touchdowns in his career. Essentially, he is like an IPO stock you add to a portfolio to make big increases to your returns. Of course, he should not be the only "big gamble" on the roster since he is so likely to fail. What we should be doing is stuffing the roster full of other high-risk, high-reward prospects(up to a reasonable level, of course) so at least one of them sticks. What we need are players with huge returns, not hedges like T.O. Hankerson is just one of many attempts we should be trying to get a true #1. If he fails, so be it. Cut his ass and find another prospect, not hedges like T.O. The Draft and FA occurs every year. There is always opportunity to restock from those sources. Besides, I highly doubt we need T.O to be the Wide Receiver Buddha for our young kids. Less athletic and successful WRs could also serve as a teacher and mentor to our young'uns since teaching football(or anything else, for that matter) is a whole different animal from playing football, and T.O is nutty enough that I'd stay away from him. Moss isn't going to IR yet; he could still be giving pointer on the sideline. Quote:
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness". Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten. The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan. |
||
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|