Espn rates Donald Driver Overrated

[Rastak]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play. Now I don't know what he used for these metrics completely and they ARE subjective but I do take them seriously. Two years ago he said Winfield was one of the worst coverage CB's in the league. Last year he said his metrics had improved. You can agree or disagree with him but he's got a very interesting system and he works harder that all of us on studying this stuff. He basically quit his job two years ago and watched football games all day every day to write a "Bill James" type book on football. I thought it was kinda cool that ESPN hired him and he admited about half the teams buy his book. It is interesting stuff.

[Freak Out]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play. Now I don't know what he used for these metrics completely and they ARE subjective but I do take them seriously. Two years ago he said Winfield was one of the worst coverage CB's in the league. Last year he said his metrics had improved. You can agree or disagree with him but he's got a very interesting system and he works harder that all of us on studying this stuff. He basically quit his job two years ago and watched football games all day every day to write a "Bill James" type book on football. I thought it was kinda cool that ESPN hired him and he admited about half the teams buy his book. It is interesting stuff.

Ok fine...but nobody calls Driver overrated and gets away with it.

[Patler]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play. Now I don't know what he used for these metrics completely and they ARE subjective but I do take them seriously. Two years ago he said Winfield was one of the worst coverage CB's in the league. Last year he said his metrics had improved. You can agree or disagree with him but he's got a very interesting system and he works harder that all of us on studying this stuff. He basically quit his job two years ago and watched football games all day every day to write a "Bill James" type book on football. I thought it was kinda cool that ESPN hired him and he admited about half the teams buy his book. It is interesting stuff.

I don't doubt that he works hard at it, but 25 drops for Driver? When JSO says 6? JSO claims to review every play of every Packer game to determine their stats too (at least they said so in the past). Why are they wrong and he right?

I'm sorry, but DD did not drop one of every 7 passes thrown his way, and that is what this "expert" is saying if DD supposedly had a drop rate of 14.4%

He may have some interesting ways to use the data, but when the data is faulty......

Plus, he obviously attaches a premium to certain things. For receivers its long passes. "YPA on bomb passes"? Yes, obviously a calculation that can be made, BUT IT IS MEANINGLESS for evaluating a receiver. "YPA on bomb passes" can very easily be more dependent on:
1, the QB;
2. pass protection;
4. the ability of the OTHER receivers to demand coverage respect; and
5. play calling (which might take into consideration 1-4)

than it is on the wide receiver being evaluated.

It seems to me that what he is evaluating is the guys FF value more than his real value to his football team.

[Rastak]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play. Now I don't know what he used for these metrics completely and they ARE subjective but I do take them seriously. Two years ago he said Winfield was one of the worst coverage CB's in the league. Last year he said his metrics had improved. You can agree or disagree with him but he's got a very interesting system and he works harder that all of us on studying this stuff. He basically quit his job two years ago and watched football games all day every day to write a "Bill James" type book on football. I thought it was kinda cool that ESPN hired him and he admited about half the teams buy his book. It is interesting stuff.

I don't doubt that he works hard at it, but 25 drops for Driver? When JSO says 6? JSO claims to review every play of every Packer game to determine their stats too (at least they said so in the past). Why are they wrong and he right?

I'm sorry, but DD did not drop one of every 7 passes thrown his way, and that is what this "expert" is saying if DD supposedly had a drop rate of 14.4%

He may have some interesting ways to use the data, but when the data is faulty......

Plus, he obviously attaches a premium to certain things. For receivers its long passes. "YPA on bomb passes"? Yes, obviously a calculation that can be made, BUT IT IS MEANINGLESS for evaluating a receiver. "YPA on bomb passes" can very easily be more dependent on:
1, the QB;
2. pass protection;
4. the ability of the OTHER receivers to demand coverage respect; and
5. play calling (which might take into consideration 1-4)

than it is on the wide receiver being evaluated.

It seems to me that what he is evaluating is the guys FF value more than his real value to his football team.

You are completely wrong on that last statement. I read a very long article on this guy and his research had NOTHING to do with FF. Why would a guy watch every play for some offensive gaurd for a FF book? I can't argue his numbers because I didn't watch all those plays myself. What he calls a drop and what JSO does is hard to say. I would guess JSO gives the Packers the benefit of the doubt but that's still a large disparity.


Football outsiders has his catch % at 53% ( doesn't break out drops).

[Patler]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play.

The more I ponder this, the less impressed I am. Lets assume the following:

He works 365 days a year. (I'll bet he doesn't.)
He averages 10hrs/day watching film (I'll bet he doesn't.)

That's 3650 hours to watch 256 regular season games.
Seems like a lot of time? Not really!
856 minutes to analyze one game.
Roughly 6 minutes or so to analyze each play, and record his conclusions for 22 players. (After all, he rates everyone, including linemen, supposedly for EVERY play).

In actuallity, he watches film less than that, I suspect. After all, he writes a book, writes articles and must spend as much time making his calculations and analyzing them as he does watching film.

There are either shortcuts being taken, or a large staff being used which losses consistency.

Yes, he spends more total time than we do, but for all 32 teams. We might very easily know DD (and other Packers) better than he does.

[Patler]

let me try again, my quoted sections are screwed up!

[Patler]

You do realize that his metrics are derived from watching every player every play all season long and during the offseason for his yearly book right? He takes into account many factors on all metrics. QB bad decisions for instance are base on ALL the circumstances of a play. Now I don't know what he used for these metrics completely and they ARE subjective but I do take them seriously. Two years ago he said Winfield was one of the worst coverage CB's in the league. Last year he said his metrics had improved. You can agree or disagree with him but he's got a very interesting system and he works harder that all of us on studying this stuff. He basically quit his job two years ago and watched football games all day every day to write a "Bill James" type book on football. I thought it was kinda cool that ESPN hired him and he admited about half the teams buy his book. It is interesting stuff.

I don't doubt that he works hard at it, but 25 drops for Driver? When JSO says 6? JSO claims to review every play of every Packer game to determine their stats too (at least they said so in the past). Why are they wrong and he right?

I'm sorry, but DD did not drop one of every 7 passes thrown his way, and that is what this "expert" is saying if DD supposedly had a drop rate of 14.4%

He may have some interesting ways to use the data, but when the data is faulty......

Plus, he obviously attaches a premium to certain things. For receivers its long passes. "YPA on bomb passes"? Yes, obviously a calculation that can be made, BUT IT IS MEANINGLESS for evaluating a receiver. "YPA on bomb passes" can very easily be more dependent on:
1, the QB;
2. pass protection;
4. the ability of the OTHER receivers to demand coverage respect; and
5. play calling (which might take into consideration 1-4)

than it is on the wide receiver being evaluated.

It seems to me that what he is evaluating is the guys FF value more than his real value to his football team.

You are completely wrong on that last statement. I read a very long article on this guy and his research had NOTHING to do with FF. Why would a guy watch every play for some offensive gaurd for a FF book? I can't argue his numbers because I didn't watch all those plays myself. What he calls a drop and what JSO does is hard to say. I would guess JSO gives the Packers the benefit of the doubt but that's still a large disparity.


Football outsiders has his catch % at 53% ( doesn't break out drops).

My comment was directed specifically at some of the types of calculations he does, and my example was "YPA on bomb passes" It is a meaningless evaluation for the 5 reasons I gave, except perhaps for FF. It has nothing to do with evaluating his value to his NFL team, but it may have significance for FF

[Packers4Ever]

Driver still rules in my book. Screw the "experts."

You tell 'em, pittstang5, what do KC Joyner and ESPN know anyway?

Donald's still OUR guy !!

[BooHoo]

ESPN is overrated.

The bad comments about ESPN are underrated.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Sports in general is getting to this stats and metrics based evaluation. You see it in the NBA in the Eff% rating. Baseball has become a stat geeks wet dream with OBP, OPS, situational hitting and pitching, lefty vs righty, expected wins per runs scored, etc.

Football is a very difficult game to do this with on an individual basis. Football is such a different game than either the NBA or MLB as it is far more team oriented and the results are highly influenced on the rest of players on the field. Baseball and basketball are ultimately 1 on 1 contests, thus they lend themselves to this metrics. Not so with football.

Football has much more of a human evaluation component to it than other sports, IMO. The sheer number of players makes it impossible to simply go off of numbers for individuals. Granted there is the QB rating calculator, but even then, it is not the end-all-be-all for judging their ability. The surrounding cast needs to be judged as well when looking at a player.

[packinpatland]

Sports in general is getting to this stats and metrics based evaluation. You see it in the NBA in the Eff% rating. Baseball has become a stat geeks wet dream with OBP, OPS, situational hitting and pitching, lefty vs righty, expected wins per runs scored, etc.

Football is a very difficult game to do this with on an individual basis. Football is such a different game than either the NBA or MLB as it is far more team oriented and the results are highly influenced on the rest of players on the field. Baseball and basketball are ultimately 1 on 1 contests, thus they lend themselves to this metrics. Not so with football.

Football has much more of a human evaluation component to it than other sports, IMO. The sheer number of players makes it impossible to simply go off of numbers for individuals. Granted there is the QB rating calculator, but even then, it is not the end-all-be-all for judging their ability. The surrounding cast needs to be judged as well when looking at a player.

Don't you think that alot of this is 'fantasy' fueled?

[wist43]

Given all of the Packers offensive problems last year - and likely again this year - it's amazing that anyone can conclude anything other than that DD is superman.

YPA, of 7.6??? Patterns had to be necessarily short a disproportionate amount of the time b/c the OL couldn't block anybody... that's not DD's fault.

Beyond the pathetic OL, there's the design of the offense itself... 2 yd passes are more common in this offense than are 15 yd passes. That's not DD's fault.

And of course, the fact that there isn't anyone else on the team that defenses respect, hence mandating that all 11 defenders are draped all over DD on just about every play. That isn't DD's fault either.

Numbers simply don't give an accurate picture in DD's case.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Sports in general is getting to this stats and metrics based evaluation. You see it in the NBA in the Eff% rating. Baseball has become a stat geeks wet dream with OBP, OPS, situational hitting and pitching, lefty vs righty, expected wins per runs scored, etc.

Football is a very difficult game to do this with on an individual basis. Football is such a different game than either the NBA or MLB as it is far more team oriented and the results are highly influenced on the rest of players on the field. Baseball and basketball are ultimately 1 on 1 contests, thus they lend themselves to this metrics. Not so with football.

Football has much more of a human evaluation component to it than other sports, IMO. The sheer number of players makes it impossible to simply go off of numbers for individuals. Granted there is the QB rating calculator, but even then, it is not the end-all-be-all for judging their ability. The surrounding cast needs to be judged as well when looking at a player.

Don't you think that alot of this is 'fantasy' fueled?

Absolutely. Baseball is the king of that sport, especially because they have come up with every stat under the sun to grade players.

Football is simple for the most part. Yards and TDs. That's about 85% of the fantasy scoring. Either guys produce or they don't. Doesn't matter how many tries they get.

[packinpatland]

he admited about half the teams buy his book.

This is the line that bothers me, 'admited'?....... Like he did something wrong. Well................

[Partial]

And of course, the fact that there isn't anyone else on the team that defenses respect, hence mandating that all 11 defenders are draped all over DD on just about every play. That isn't DD's fault either.

That is just a really funny passage. We need a PR quotes HOF