View Single Post
  #56  
Old 10-23-2020, 09:43 AM
Dam8610 Dam8610 is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 5,995
Thanks: 102
Thanked 1,595 Times in 925 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
You say it’s subjective. I think it’s well explained and makes sense as a more in depth evaluation. Is he a super accurate QB? No. That is not what he is known for. Even the regular way of estimating accuracy, he is below his peers. Do you have an example of their bias in action?

Also he had 28 tds throwing, 14 rushing. It’s not like NDSU is playing top competition. Their closest game was against South Dakota State. The one game they had this year against Central Arkansas he threw an int. I’m not saying there isn’t stuff to like about him. There are good tools to work with and he does have promise. I just don’t know if he is a top five QB like some are making him out to be. And I’m not sure about his accuracy which I think is the most important trait for a QB.
I say it's subjective because their main statistic that they're famous for relies on them "grading" each play for each player, with no objective criteria given for how a player earns each level of grade on a given play. That means they're going to inherently be prone to giving players they like more positive grades than players they don't like. Also each individual grader might grade the same play for the same player differently. For the particular accuracy metric you shared, the way I could easily see biases creeping into that is that they've defined target areas and what makes a bad throw, an okay throw, a good throw, and a great throw. But what if the ball placement is in between target areas? How does that get graded? Dependence on the grader and their personal biases is once again high. It's easy to imagine one of their graders dinging a QB like Peyton Manning early in his career hard for doing something you described positively with good reason. Low throws and underthrows are bad in their grading system, but a QB doing it to cut down on INTs is doing a good thing, we seem to agree on that. If PFF's grader just despised underthrown footballs or that QB for some reason, it's very easy for him or her to ding his accuracy heavily in that grading system. I don't have proof of their biases in action other than they have no objective criteria by which their numbers are easily reproducible.

I think you and I mostly agree on Lance. The biggest area of disagreement seems to be accuracy. Of course level of competition is a concern, but productivity mitigates that somewhat. My biggest concern is that he tries to play like Cam Newton but looks more like RG3. He needs to use his mobility to escape pressure and keep plays alive, but scrambling should be the last resort. That's my biggest reason for being hesitant to put him with the top QBs in the class, and as I said earlier, I don't know that Ballard and Reich will want to stake their careers on this kid.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
i was wrong.
Reply With Quote