on a scale of 1-100 in terms of my interest in advanced metrics in the NFL, i'd put it somewhere in the low to mid single digits... i do like some of the work PFF does but that is mostly using eye test to put a numerical score on a play... so its barely considered 'metrics' since its subjective.shel311 wrote:A couple of the advanced metrics guys say Tannehill is the most underrated QB in the league.
you need constants to be able analyze things with numbers/data. in a sport with 22 moving players all at varying degrees of quality and different goals per play (run or pass, long or short) it's nearly impossible to use metrics to analyze the sport. don't get me wrong, i'd be trying to incorporate it into my analysis somehow... but i'd be using metrics much more in things like play selection where there is an absolute 1st and 10, 3rd and 1 etc. and game philosophy stuff. trying to compare players using it is nearly useless in my opinion. Ryan Tannehill is like the most accurate qb of all time and barely has a .500 winning percentage.
then you have to incorporate sample size and in football the sample is so small that the data is almost always skewed or incomplete. then you have to incorporate what a backup has in terms of prep work throughout a week vs a starter. an offense is like a well rehearsed dance choreography and if you haven't been practicing with the rest of the team the chances are you're going to be off on timing. in other sports, baseball/basketball you don't get those types of moving part issues that you do in football, i could go pitch in the MLB tomorrow and if i've been training my body you can analyze my performance against Kershaw and it'd be pretty fair (with fip data of course

