PDA

View Full Version : Read This, Be Smarter: Air Yards Versus YAC



pbmax
01-09-2011, 10:23 AM
Fritz said I need to step it up this week if the Packers are to beat the Eagles. Its a heavy burden, but here we go.

Is it better to throw longer passes (perhaps completing fewer) or to throw quickly and let the WR make some hay? (http://community.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/examining-qb-yards-after-catch.html)

Longer passes attempt to move the offense into advantageous field position quickly, where they are more likely to score (and the opponent less likely). Quicker shorter passes are theoretically easier to complete and might allow a WR to escape coverage and wind their way down the field, whereas many longer routes send the receiver angling to the sideline to gain separation.

The answer is probably intuitive: you want to move in as big a chuck of yardage as possible for each play. Regardless of whether those yards are gained on the arm or on the leg, you want to move efficiently. Maximize your talent.

This article, using some incomplete data (only the top 20 QBs are publicly available year over year) attempts to find out who is traveling largely by air, versus the toes of the receivers.

http://community.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/examining-qb-yards-after-catch.html

The second table has the most interesting numbers, showing Rodgers yards coming more from the air than most QBs, with Favre at the other end of the spectrum. But the fun really starts to happen in the comments, when a commenter tries to argue that the QB has an influence in YAC, despite the earlier work showing that correlation is weak compared to the receiver themselves.

His data for the argument? The QBs for the 2007 and the 2008 Green Bay Packers.

Scott Campbell
01-09-2011, 10:24 AM
I always said Favre made everybody around him better.

denverYooper
01-09-2011, 11:56 AM
Fritz said I need to step it up this week if the Packers are to beat the Eagles. Its a heavy burden, but here we go.

Is it better to throw longer passes (perhaps completing fewer) or to throw quickly and let the WR make some hay? (http://community.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/examining-qb-yards-after-catch.html)

Longer passes attempt to move the offense into advantageous field position quickly, where they are more likely to score (and the opponent less likely). Quicker shorter passes are theoretically easier to complete and might allow a WR to escape coverage and wind their way down the field, whereas many longer routes send the receiver angling to the sideline to gain separation.

The answer is probably intuitive: you want to move in as big a chuck of yardage as possible for each play. Regardless of whether those yards are gained on the arm or on the leg, you want to move efficiently. Maximize your talent.

This article, using some incomplete data (only the top 20 QBs are publicly available year over year) attempts to find out who is traveling largely by air, versus the toes of the receivers.

http://community.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/examining-qb-yards-after-catch.html

The second table has the most interesting numbers, showing Rodgers yards coming more from the air than most QBs, with Favre at the other end of the spectrum. But the fun really starts to happen in the comments, when a commenter tries to argue that the QB has an influence in YAC, despite the earlier work showing that correlation is weak compared to the receiver themselves.

His data for the argument? The QBs for the 2007 and the 2008 Green Bay Packers.

Doesn't Brian also link long passes to his WPA stat elsewhere on that site, arguing that long completed passes equate to much greater win probability? I'll try to dig that up.

pbmax
01-09-2011, 12:12 PM
I always said Favre made everybody around him better.

I do think that specific routes lend themselves to YAC and Favre probably specializes in them. The slant, being the most obvious. It doesn't mean Favre is more accurate or hyper capable of QB-influenced YAC, but he can (and loves to) thrown that route.

denverYooper
01-09-2011, 12:25 PM
I was off, he related pass depth to EPA (Expected Points Added) (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/01/expected-points-ep-and-expected-points.html).

Deep vs. Short: http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/09/deep-vs-short-passes.html
Breakout by Down: http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/epa-by-pass-depth-and-down.html

First, he argues that


In normal football situations, in which the clock is not yet a factor and the score is relatively close, pass plays, including sacks, yield an average of +0.08 Expected Points Added (EPA), while run plays yield an average of +0.01 EPA.


He then goes on to point out that passes classified as "Deep", admittedly a vague classification, result in a 0.45 expected points added and that short passes result in -0.01. Short passes have a higher success rate, at 47%, vs deep (43%) but the ensuing discussion and takeaway is that it is to a team's overall benefit to be able to go vertical when the score is close and the clock is not a factor.

swede
01-09-2011, 02:08 PM
I always said Favre made everybody around him bitter.

fixed