- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 29,794
- Reaction score
- 20,459
When the last Bill Barnwell article was posted here (about whether or not the Pats'-style 2TE offense is the wave of the future), it sparked a conversation that I may have slightly derailed by making it about his Football Outsiders background and his over-reliance on stats without context.
To that effect, I actually really liked today's article, and for anyone who isn't familiar with his (or Football Outsiders' in general) work, it's a great opportunity to get on board, as he does a really good job of introducing the reader to some of the most fundamental of advanced football statistics. He also makes a very straightforward and compelling case for why statistics do matter, and can offer insight where "all that matters is the W" cannot. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, but for those who have an interest, I'd definitely encourage reading on:
Breaking down the best of the NFL stats - Grantland
Specifically, I was relieved to read the following:
In my previous criticism of him, the bone that I was picking was essentially that he wasn't paying enough heed to the bolded part of that paragraph, on either a team or individual level. Context matters, and in this article he does a pretty good job of acknowledging that where it needs to be acknowledged. Specifically, he acknowledges it in a very compelling way re: Tom Brady. When explaining how unpredictable the "Record in Close Games" stat is, year-over-year (or even half-season over half-season), he offered up the following information:
If we need any reminder of how exceptional Brady is, and the ways in which he really does stand head and shoulders above even the other elites at quarterback, I think that's a great example. In essence, in games decided by a touchdown or less, we have:
Brady with the Patriots: won 74.1% of games
Manning with the Colts: won 65.9% of games
Brees with the Saints: won 57.9% of games
Rodgers with the Packers: won 43.3% of games
Granted, it's not an end-all measurement by any means, since as a standalone yardstick it would deem it 'better' to win by 3 than by 30. Still an interesting point, though, since the context here is that it seems like the only way to consistently maintain a good record in close games is with either Tom Brady or Peyton Manning at quarterback. They've been so good that they're simply statistical exceptions to a rule that applies to everyone else in the league.
To that effect, I actually really liked today's article, and for anyone who isn't familiar with his (or Football Outsiders' in general) work, it's a great opportunity to get on board, as he does a really good job of introducing the reader to some of the most fundamental of advanced football statistics. He also makes a very straightforward and compelling case for why statistics do matter, and can offer insight where "all that matters is the W" cannot. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, but for those who have an interest, I'd definitely encourage reading on:
Breaking down the best of the NFL stats - Grantland
Specifically, I was relieved to read the following:
In my previous criticism of him, the bone that I was picking was essentially that he wasn't paying enough heed to the bolded part of that paragraph, on either a team or individual level. Context matters, and in this article he does a pretty good job of acknowledging that where it needs to be acknowledged. Specifically, he acknowledges it in a very compelling way re: Tom Brady. When explaining how unpredictable the "Record in Close Games" stat is, year-over-year (or even half-season over half-season), he offered up the following information:
If we need any reminder of how exceptional Brady is, and the ways in which he really does stand head and shoulders above even the other elites at quarterback, I think that's a great example. In essence, in games decided by a touchdown or less, we have:
Brady with the Patriots: won 74.1% of games
Manning with the Colts: won 65.9% of games
Brees with the Saints: won 57.9% of games
Rodgers with the Packers: won 43.3% of games
Granted, it's not an end-all measurement by any means, since as a standalone yardstick it would deem it 'better' to win by 3 than by 30. Still an interesting point, though, since the context here is that it seems like the only way to consistently maintain a good record in close games is with either Tom Brady or Peyton Manning at quarterback. They've been so good that they're simply statistical exceptions to a rule that applies to everyone else in the league.
Last edited:
