Rob Gronkowski versus Jason Witten: Who had the better game?

[RelocatedPatFan]

One other point worth noting here: out of Witten's catches, only 7 of them produced first downs (most of the rest, though, did put the Cowboys into manageable situations like 3rd-and-1 or 2nd-and-4. Every one of GRONK's catches either produced a first down or a touchdown.

That's almost criminal. 18 catches with an above 9 yards per reception should produce at a minimum 12 first downs (unless had a huge outlier or two with 50-80 yards catches).

Either that was the case, or the cowboys put themselves in some bad spots through negative plays or penalties.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

That's almost criminal. 18 catches with an above 9 yards per reception should produce at a minimum 12 first downs (unless had a huge outlier or two with 50-80 yards catches).

Either that was the case, or the cowboys put themselves in some bad spots through negative plays or penalties.

Here's how it happened. Notice a pattern?

1-10: 11 yards
1-10: 7
1-10: 9
2-10: 20
1-10: 9
1-10: incomplete
1-10: 8
1-10: 8
1-10: incomplete
1-10: 6
3-4: 5
1-10: 14
1-10: 6
1-10: 10
1-10: 9
2-1: 9
1-10: 9
2-1: incomplete
2-10: 13
1-10: 4
3-6: 10
2-10: incomplete

 

[Kasmir]

Football Outsiders has their "Quick Reads" column up for week 8:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Week 8 Quick Reads

According to them, Gronkowski had the better game than Witten by DYAR (total production) -- which means he had a vastly better game by DVOA (per play production).

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Here's how it happened. Notice a pattern?

1-10: 11 yards
1-10: 7
1-10: 9
2-10: 20
1-10: 9
1-10: incomplete
1-10: 8
1-10: 8
1-10: incomplete
1-10: 6
3-4: 5
1-10: 14
1-10: 6
1-10: 10
1-10: 9
2-1: 9
1-10: 9
2-1: incomplete
2-10: 13
1-10: 4
3-6: 10
2-10: incomplete

*liked for pure effort of collecting/reporting that information.

yeah, Witten's route running is notoriously short by a yard or two. Still, if it was on blitzes or the like it might be more understandable. But being 2nd and 1-3 isn;t the worst either.

You'd think the Giants would have adjusted and taken him out...18 catches on 22 targets is still outstanding.

 

[Deus Irae]

Witten set the NFL record for TE receptions in a game, and he did it against the Giants, and many of you are acting as if his game doesn't belong in the discussion with Gronk's. That should tell you just how far gone in crazy land you are.

 

[Deus Irae]

One other point worth noting here: out of Witten's catches, only 7 of them produced first downs (most of the rest, though, did put the Cowboys into manageable situations like 3rd-and-1 or 2nd-and-4. Every one of GRONK's catches either produced a first down or a touchdown.

13 of his 18 receptions were on first down. All 5 of his receptions that were on other downs were catches for first downs.

So, he was giving the Cowboys great down/distance with his first down catches, and he was moving the chains with his other catches.

 

[borg]

Without Gronks TDs.....the Pats would have been held to a meager 31 points. Yep....Gronk carried the Pats against an otherwise dominating D

Here in the world of "Pats good, World bad"....I can only imagine the poetic waxing if Welker put up an 18 catch performance.....or if it was Hernandez

As for the tearing down Witten's day by saying most of his catches were on first down, therefore diminishing his achievement....do you really think the Giants felt they needed to respect the run on first down with their big lead. Romo threw it 62 times....the run was scrapped....and Witten was the biggest part of their comeback. Don't diminish his great day because his offense coughed up the ball 6 times.

 

[Finnishfan]

Just curious if there are any sabermetric types out there that want to attack this question. Who had a better game yesterday, in terms of giving their team a better chance to win? This is NOT based on observing the game, but rather, it is based on the statistics of these two players only. It also not based on Romo, Brady, supporting casts, coaching, or outcomes. It is more of a philosophical question. If you saw both of these stat lines and knew nothing about the game, which player's production would you presume led to a greater chance of victory?

Also, touchdowns are irrelevant for the sake of this analysis.

Rob Gronkowski- 13 targets, 8 receptions, 146 yards
Yards per target: 11.23; Yards per reception: 18.3

Jason Witten-- 22 targets, 18 receptions, 167 yards
Yards per target: 7.59; Yards per reception: 9.28

I began thinking about this last year before the Super Bowl when Giants fans argued that Victor Cruz was a better slot receiver than Wes Welker because his YPR and YPT was higher, leading them to believe that Cruz is more effective. I thought this was probably correct, yet I also thought there is something to be said for moving the chains more consistently by picking up more positive plays.

What do you think?

You cannot take statistics out of context and analyze them properly. Or if you do, then you gotta study a whole lot more than just 3 key numbers.

If you would break down every target presenting the yardage, down and distance and field position then it would be valid to compare which one had a better game purely in terms of "advancing their respective teams down the field".

Also, YAC would be very vital information.

Based on those stats alone, its hard to compare them. However, I will give it a go.

Gronk was the more effective one in terms of YPT and YPR, and obviously based on those numbers he presumably had more big plays. Big plays (along with records, points and turnovers) are key statistics used to determine gambling odds, and a lot of statistical researchers in football believe in the "toxic differential" theory.

However, Witten has a decent YPR average as well, which would indicate that he kept the chains moving consistently throughout the night. Also, 18 receptions and 167 yards are both insanely high numbers.

Therefore if I had to make a choice, I would choose Witten, just becouse his YPR/YPT are both "good enough" and he was featured way more in the offense with 9 targets and 10 receptions more than Gronk.

 

[Finnishfan]

Witten set the NFL record for TE receptions in a game, and he did it against the Giants, and many of you are acting as if his game doesn't belong in the discussion with Gronk's. That should tell you just how far gone in crazy land you are.

Agreed.

Furthermore, the end result is hardly ever a valid argument when analyzing a players performance. Even the most important player, QB, can have a heavenly performance and still lose the game. If you disagree, then obviously you have watched the Patriots over the past 3 years. HOF caliber games from opposing QBs time and time again, yet they usually come away as the losers.

In that Giants game, Witten was as clutch as I have EVER seen a TE be. Romo did his best to lose the game before the halftime, but thanks to Cowboys defense and Witten's second half play he ALMOST failed.

 

[JJDChE]

That's like saying you should discount any homeruns when comparing baseball players.

Based on these stats who would you say had the better offensive season in 2012?

Player A .280 batting average 152 hits
Player B .316 batting average 216 hits

Who helped their team more and had the better season?

But now let's look at the actual WHOLE picture

Player A .280 batting average 152 hits 42 homeruns - Edwin Encarnacion
Player B .316 batting average 216 hits 15 homeruns - Derek Jeter

Yeah, disallowing consideration of touchdowns is just as bad as disallowing consideration of homeruns.

HRs =/= TDs

In any given plate appearance only the batter can create a HR. In a football game, any of about 8-10 players can score a TD on a particular drive. Having an individual NOT score a TD on a given drive is not a lost opportunity, unless the player was targeted and dropped the ball. If a batter doesn't hit a home run it is a lost opportunity.

 

[oldrover]

This is NOT based on observing the game, but rather, it is based on the statistics of these two players only. It also not based on Romo, Brady, supporting casts, coaching, or outcomes. It is more of a philosophical question. If you saw both of these stat lines and knew nothing about the game, which player's production would you presume led to a greater chance of victory?

Also, touchdowns are irrelevant for the sake of this analysis.

Can anyone read?

Just because YOU say touchdowns are irrelevant to the analysis doesn't make them so. Also, they're part of your hallowed 'stat line', Einstein. What, we're supposed to read half of the stat line and stop there? What if Gronk had two fumbles? Can't count those? This is some in-depth analyzing, all right. LMAO!!! :biggrin2:

 

[ScottieC]

Gronkowskis team won, Wittens did not.
Stats accumulated while losing are not as good as stats accumulated while winning.

Unless they are Peyton's post season numbers and in that case they are deemed "Hall of Fame worthy".