So....forgetting the draft, are we a better team than that one exiting the playoffs?

I have offered a better method, i have offered both an in depth statistical analysis and a film based analysis. I dont care that you dont like those, i dont really give a ****. But why do you think there is a necessity for all these teams to do so much film, statistical, and grading of their offensive line play if you can just look at the effectiveness through YPC?

The fact that you still dont get that there is so many different variables that can affect YPC that it makes it a terrible measure of run blocking effectiveness is mind boggling.

 

I understand the thread. How is it possible that you still do not get that YPC is a measure of pure output, not the process that got that output. Process > result. With all the different variables over the course of a season and the 22 variables on the field on every play, simple yards gained doesnt tell you anywhere close to the whole story of the effectiveness of the run blocking.

 

How can you not understand that I don't, for this scenario, care about the process?

Your PFF etc have offered nothing in regards to disproving or proving anything. It's opinion.

However, what is NOT opinion is that each side of the offensive line produced the same amount of rushing yards and the same YPC.

 

good lord. It is also fact that 2 pitchers can both have an era of 3 or 2 NBA players can score the same amount of points, that doesnt mean those players are the same. Again, you can have a completely unnuanced opinion and think it is a proper argument. you can use it to evaluate offensive line play, that doesnt make it a good determinant of offensive line play. Something can both be a fact and not indicate what you are saying that fact indicates.

Both sides of the OL can average the same YPC. That fact doesnt mean that both sides are equal when you take into account all the variables that go into gaining 4 yards on any single play.

 

It's a good thing we're not comparing individuals then, huh?

Remember Michael Jordan? Even before the Bulls started winning Championships he was the best player in the league. I wouldn't call Isiah Thomas a better player than Jordan, but his Pistons used to kick the Bulls *** on a regular basis.

Now, see if you can use that scenario in what it is that's really going on here.

Got it? Probably not...

Let me help you...

The goal for the offensive line when it comes to run blocking is to create holes for the RB, right? And in doing so the RB gains yards, right?

Well, the left and right sides of the offensive line produced the same amount of rushing yards. And unless you can show me why the right side was so much worse, and yet produced the same amount of yards you're wasting your breath.

 

jesus you really think that point was about comparing individuals? you have a special ability to not comprehend the most basic of analogies.

If you want, 2 teams have team ERA's of 3. One team can be a significantly better pitching team despite that being a fact. 2 NBA teams can give up the same amount of PPG or score the same amount of PPG. that doesnt take into account a bunch of different variables that go into taking that fact in its proper context. Pure output and average without proper context is meaningless in any context, let alone the idiotic context of using YPC as a pure measure of run blocking effectiveness.

 

Youre aware there can be a fact (in this case a basic to calculate statistic), and it not correlate to the thing you think it does in the way you think it does, correct?

 

Son, you're still lost. I totally understand what your're trying to accomplish. For the most part I've been toying with you. However, you're trying to prove something that's not even the answer to the problem. I said what does 2+2= and you keep giving an answer of "blue".

You keep going back to subjective methods. I've never once used any subjectivity.

Each side of the o-line produced the same amount of rushing yards. Period. That's not subjective.

Rock wanted to assert that the left side of the o-line "excelled at run blocking". He too was unable to give any objective data. His "because I say so" method is just as meaningful as your DVOA and PFF. Well, your's may be slightly better.

However, if I want to get across the river I don't give a **** if I take a boat or cross a bridge. I'm still on the other side of the river.

So, unless you can prove to me that the right side of the line was worse at run blocking than the left you're just pissing in the wind.

 

Dude, IDK where you went to school but wherever the **** you learned reading comprehension and how to make analogies failed you.

Your 2+2 analogy was horrible. Again, im not debating the accuracy of your stats. Im debating that your stats dont indicate what you are saying they indicate. You can continue to feign ignorance and say that facts are facts. But you cant say that because something is a fact, it must indicate something that that stat does not indicate. I have given you plenty of different reasons why that stat is not actually indicative of what you are saying it is. If you want to go on a basic stat with no nuance or further investigation into the variables that make up that stat, that's on you. But your lack of interest in further investigation of that stat doesnt make that stat indicative of things that that stat does not actually indicate.

Say two people are driving to the same destination from the same place. One guy can get there in an hour, the other in 8 days. The fact that they both got there doesnt mean that one route isnt better than the other. And so you dont purposefully misconstrue the point in that argument, that means that just because two things end up in the same thing, the process to get there is the same.

 

You have piss all over your face.

Either show me HOW yards and YPC can't or don't show how well an o-line run blocks or keep drowning in your own piss.

 

ive shown you multiple stats, film evaluations, and well informed articles of why YPC is a terrible measurement of offensive line play. I have a task for you, find me an article that tells me that YPC by itself is a good measurement of offensive line play. Please do. I cant wait to read it.

 

ill wait for 1 article to help prove you point.

 

funny how that works when asked for any shred of evidence from any reputable source on YPC being a good measurement.

 

You were up all night hitting refresh weren't you?

lol

You still have piss on your face.

 

no believe it or not i dont really care about this argument at all, i just know you're wrong. ill be waiting on any sort of credible opinion telling me that YPC is a good indicator of OL blocking alone. Newsflash for you, you'll find literally the exact opposite of that if you did any shred of looking into it. But please continue to tell me about the piss on my face to distract from the fact that you cant find a single credible source confirming the legitimacy of what you are saying.

 

Back on topic:

In all of last season, there was exactly one game where we had Tannehill, Ajayi, Pouncey and Rashad Jones in the starting lineup together. Week 6 vs Pittsburgh. That's it.

There were only four games, Week 6-10, where RT, Ajayi and Pouncey were in there together. The team went 4-0 and averaged 180 rushing yards and 29 points per game.

And only eight games where even RT and Ajayi were in the starting lineup, and we went 7-1.

You have to expect that by the virtue of health and another year in Gase's system alone that the team will be better in 2017, before you even take into account the additions we've made and will make.

---Unlucky13

 

Yes, I can really tell that you don't care by the way you wrote a post 3 different times without a reply from me. lol

Anyhow, if you can't see the merits of using rushing yards and ypc when determining offensive line run blocking ability I'm not sure I can help you.

As has been mentioned, it's not the end all be all. However, it's a pretty good indicator as to how well they performed. I mean, if the left side "excelled" and the right side sucked (which has been the opinion of some) you'd expect at least some difference in rushing yards. However, we see none.

And once more, I don't give a **** HOW the right side obtained the same amount of rushing yards and YPC, I just care that they did.

And if you're so hell bent on proving something, do it. Because so far you've done nothing but whine and give opinion.

As individuals no one is trying to say that Bushrod is as good as Tunsil. However, when comparing the right side vs the left side of the o-line, they both did well in terms of run blocking. How do I know? Because their outcomes were the same.

 

How are you judging the effectiveness of the run blocking? If both sides had similar numbers of rushes, and both sides had similar overall yards and ypc, then both sides performed about the same.

If two baseball teams have combined era's of 3, then both teams are the effected the same, as both teams are giving up on average 3 runs. However, the era analogy is flawed, as a batter could hit a dribbler down the first base line, and it could be an easy out for the first baseman, but he flubs it, and it goes between his legs (Bill Buckner style) , and a runner scores from third, this worsening the pitcher's era. So, there's much more out of the pitchers control. Blocking is blocking, and both sides performed relatively the same, therefore, neither side was any better or worse than the other side.

 

This is like the guys who used to want to take away Ronnie Brown or Lamarr Miller's big runs, to argue that they weren't very good, since without the big runs their ypc went down.

 

I'm not going to really interject myself into this debate. However, I believe the more comparable analogy between the NFL vs NBA comparison would be OL YPC vs. FG%, not OL YPC vs. Points Made. If you're going to use a more equivalent comparison (I don't think you can really relate stats through two different sports though, at least in this debate).

 

Yeah, but phins18 will say that certain FG's in the NBA don't count if the ball is banked etc...lol...Only "nothing but net" shots really matter because it's the process and not the FG that matters.

 

You can make the argument that our OL wasnt much effective OVERALL in the running game but Ajayi masked deficiencies with his almost record breaking yards after contact. In the end production was good so we can be happy but it's not stupid to wonder if and how we can get better or avoid to slip if Ajayi breaks less tackles.
In an OL especially in the run game it's hard to have one player performing a lot better or a lot worse than the others on the same unit because it's a heavily interconnected work. With Pouncey on the field everybody performed better, not just the center position. Probably Pouncey is more important than Bushrod here since Bushrod cant drag down this unit as much as Pouncey can elevate it.

The reasoning can be that if we take Zeitler (or any other big time guard) our upgrade is minimal either we have Pouncey or we dont have Pouncey because he is the real cathalyst of the unit.

 

That's not the argument. It wasn't even close to being the argument.

But just to be on topic, if a guy is running at 2 ypc all game, and then breaks one for 90 yards, all of a sudden his average is pretty good.

But for 20 carries he was killing drives. It's all about looking at it an advanced level. It's not about taking anything away. It's analysis. That's why the teams use advanced metrics and not just "oh it's 4.5 ypc." That's why success rate is a thing for RBs. A RB who will flat out gain nothing or lose yardage on 5 runs but then smash another 5 runs, is a different player than a guy who's gonna have a good success rate. You don't take it away, and keep it away. You take it away and take a peek, and then put it back.

Ajayi, surprisingly, is 32nd last year in success rate according to FO's formula:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb

So a RB who gets 3 yards on 3rd and 2 takes a hit YPC but not success rate, etc.

Surprisingly enough, Gilislee was #1, 66% of his runs hit those marks above. It's not perfect. For example, RB gets 2 yards on 1st and 10, but 11 yards next, well their success rate is 50% but not too bad a result. Just another thing to look at.

 

Sure, Jdang, I get that. However, most running backs aren't amassing 150 yards a game on 10 rushes or less. Most backs are going to have what, maybe two big ruins a game? By big, I mean like 20+ yards. We know, forb instance, that Ajayi seems to get bigger runs layer in games, after the defense is tired. Most backs will show a decrease in ypc if you take away their big runs.

 

Bingo.

 

So you're 90 years old....


no wonder

 

Any rating system that lists Ajayi last in success and Gilislee as 1st, is an effing stupid flawed system and you literally need no other proof.

 

either that or it goes to show you in the rating flaws of basic stats. but lets not let in depth analysis cloud your biased judgment. amiright. YPC FTW!!!!!!!

 

you have an incredible ratio of posts that dont actually say anything to people who are actively finding sources to prove your dumbass statements wrong.

 

You have to be a joke account or are someone who has been banned and came back under another name.

 

You're hilarious.

Let's ignore Gillislee averaged 5.7 his past two seasons and 8 TDs last year on 100 carries. The other RBs at the top in success rate includes Ezekiel, Derek Henry and Leveon bell.

Ajayi had monster games but he also had 4-5 games with 2 or 3 ypc. That effects his success rate.

 

So you're using ypc? lol

phins18? Why are you not pointing the fan at your face and pissing into it right about now?

 

Gilislee also had less than half of the attempts. Dontari Poe has a career passer rating of ~120 but I'm not going to want him as my QB. lol

 

Let's break down Gillisee's TD's, shall we?

LeSean McCoy breaks a 53 yard run to the 5 yard line.

Gillisee comes in and gets a TD rushing for 5 yards. He ends up with 2 rushes for 6 yards. (McCoy 18 for 150)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Up 38 to 16, with 5 minutes to go in the game, Gillisee breaks a 44 yard TD run against the 49ers. He ends up 6 for 61 (McCoy is 19 for 140)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Against NE he gets hist 1st start of the season. He has a 12 for 85 day. He had a 3yrd TD run.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next start he was 8 for 32 with a 1 yard TD

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next he was 8 for 49 with a 1 yard and 2 yard TD (McCoy was 17 for 130)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next he was 9 for 37 with a 3 yard TD (McCoy was 19 for 153 and 2 TD's)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next 15 for 40 with a 1 yard TD run with a few seconds on the clock and down by 27 points



Yeah..not really impressive and more proof that FO sucks...lol

 

Ok, I'm hilarious.

Would you swap Gilly for Ajayi right now, yes or no?

Thought so...you can take FO and their grades and shove them.

 

Right. On the same team McCoy is regularly rushing for 130+ yards. When Gilly starts he can't break 100. lol

 

Is be interested in knowing how Gillislee is so good based on ypc, but we shouldn't be judging our oline on ypc.

 

If Gillislee can get 5.7 YPC as a starting RB instead of as a change of pace back, then his stats mean a lot more to me.

Anyway, for info this is what the rush yard distributions of Ajayi and Gillislee look like. The y-axis is probability of occurrence:
https://i.imgsafe.org/6cabe183aa.png

The peak for Ajayi occurs at 2 yards, while Gillislee's is at 3. As you can see Gillislee does much better than Ajayi in shorter yardage situations, gaining 3-5 instead of 1-3, while Ajayi is better for slightly longer runs of 7-10 yards. How much of this is the OL vs. RB you obviously can't tease apart.

As far as "advanced" stats go, the best way to leverage these distributions is to just randomly sample from them instead of just quoting a YPC or doing something funny like FO does. For example, you could ask what the probability is of either back getting a 1st down (10+ yards) in 3 consecutive running plays by randomly sampling from those distributions. With Ajayi it's 59% while for Gillislee it's 70%. Or you could pair these distributions with a given pass yardage distribution for some QB and see what happens.

Anyway.. the big issue here is Gillislee isn't a starter like Ajayi is so while his raw stats are generally better, I'm not sure it's that fair a comparison. Get McCoy out of there and then let's see what he does.

 

You're being silly again.

You are saying, a rating system where a RB yardage on 1st down, 60% of the yardage of 2nd down, and 100% of the yardage on 3rd down, the reasons for those standards are as clear as day, is clearly faulty because it has Ajayi so low down the list.

13 for 42. 3.2 ypc.
18 for 45. 2.5 ypc
20 for 48. 2.4 ypc
19 for 51. 2.7 ypc
16 for 59. 3.7 ypc

Those are actual game logs for Jay Ajayi. I'm sorry you can't put your homer glasses away, but those are the things that effect success rate. I never said Gillislee was the #1 back in the league, or I prefer him to Ajayi, or any of that nonsense you are imputing. I don't even know why you are bringing that up. But you're acting as if success rate is some sort of subjective rating that relies on a rater's opinion that somehow elevates Daniel Thomas to the #1 spot in the league.

Gillislee had a very efficient year last year, and was consistent in not having monster games, and low games. He had 9 TDs on 110 touches, very good success rate, and his ypc was 5.7. You are baffled why a RB with a 5.7 ypc has a high success rate. Really?

 

Absolutely. Nobody is arguing you swap Ajayi for Gillislee. But to claim a stat as silly because someone with a 5.7 ypc is rated number 1 reeks of buthurrtedness.