NFL Coach/GM Updates

[AU-panther]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Dude, you don't even know the difference between analytics and measurables.

Keep trying if you want, but oy...

I wasn’t referring just to measurables but either way this is a pointless discussion. 
You do realize the reason that Bruce was QB1 for so many people through the league was his film, you know that scouting thing you are talking about, but whatever. 

[HardcoreHokie]

When did numbers/math/statistics become “Analytics” and all of a sudden be a whole new thing?  WTF?

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

I wasn’t referring just to measurables but either way this is a pointless discussion. 
You do realize the reason that Bruce was QB1 for so many people through the league was his film, you know that scouting thing you are talking about, but whatever. 

Scouting that included...wait for it, analytics 

Reality is that a lot of football analytics is basically just an attempt to quantify things that are already scouted, as if judging an offensive lineman's knee bend using a caliper somehow makes it more reliable than just using your eyes.

Hint: It doesn't.

I know there are people who think analytics is somehow going to make scouting foolproof. It's not. Nor will anything else. It's always going to be an inexact science that some people will be better at than others.

Acting like it's some magic wand is silly.

Edited January 21 by Mr. Scot

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, HardcoreHokie said:

When did numbers/math/statistics become “Analytics” and all of a sudden be a whole new thing?  WTF?

Baseball.

And frankly, that's a sport where it makes more sense. It's more individual in nature and stat driven in results.

Football is far more physical in nature and requires heavy teamwork and chemistry on both sides of the ball.

Again, I know people want it to be some kind of magic bullet, but it just isn't.

[AU-panther]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Scouting that included...wait for it, analytics 

Reality is that a lot of football analytics is basically just an attempt to quantify things that are already scouted, as if judging an offensive lineman's knee bend using a caliper somehow makes it more reliable than just using your eyes.

Hint: It doesn't.

I know there are people who think analytics is somehow going to make scouting foolproof. It's not. Nor will anything else. It's always going to be an inexact science that some people will be better at than others.

Acting like it's some magic wand is silly.

Nobody is saying it’s a magic wand.

Aalso knee bend would be a measurable., so maybe you are the one that doesn’t know the difference between analytics and knee bend. 
Analytic people realize that it is non exact science, they are just trying to use historical data to improve future odds somewhat.  It’s the non-analytic dinosaurs that tend to think in binary, absolute terms.

 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, AU-panther said:

Nobody is saying it’s a magic wand.

Aalso knee bend would be a measurable., so maybe you are the one that doesn’t know the difference between analytics and knee bend. 
Analytic people realize that it is non exact science, they are just trying to use historical data to improve future odds somewhat.  It’s the non-analytic dinosaurs that tend to think in binary, absolute terms.

Keep trying, dude

[AU-panther]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Keep trying, dude

lol.  That’s your typical response when  discussions aren’t going your way. 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, AU-panther said:

lol.  That’s your typical response when  discussions aren’t going your way. 

Oh, I'm pretty comfortable with the way this "pointless" discussion is going

You've made clear you don't understand basic differences or definitions (historical data? yeah, sure). Hell, your last response was basically you signing on to something I'd already explained was foolish.

You don't get it. I doubt you're going to, but I expect you'll keep trying just so you can tell yourself you've stood up to me.

But hey, do you

[AU-panther]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Oh, I'm pretty comfortable with the way this "pointless" discussion is going

You've made clear you don't understand basic differences or definitions (historical data? yeah, sure). Hell, your last response was basically you signing on to something I'd already explained was foolish.

You don't get it. I doubt you're going to, but I expect you'll keep trying just so you can tell yourself you've stood up to me.

But hey, do you

And again 

[Martin]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Baseball.

And frankly, that's a sport where it makes more sense. It's more individual in nature and stat driven in results.

Football is far more physical in nature and requires heavy teamwork and chemistry on both sides of the ball.

Again, I know people want it to be some kind of magic bullet, but it just isn't.

 

29 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Baseball.

And frankly, that's a sport where it makes more sense. It's more individual in nature and stat driven in results.

Football is far more physical in nature and requires heavy teamwork and chemistry on both sides of the ball.

Again, I know people want it to be some kind of magic bullet, but it just isn't.

Nobody has ever said it is a magic bullet. Those are your words, you’re the only one who took it to that extreme to, I’m guessing, prove some kind of point that was outside of this discussion.
 

But I certainly agree to completely disagree with your view that analytics should not be used and evaluations in person and on film is the only proper way to project a college player in to the NFL.

[Martin]

Btw, here is a definition: Predictive analytics is the process of using data to forecast future outcomes. The process uses data analysis, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and statistical models to find patterns that might predict future behavior.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Martin said:

Nobody has ever said it is a magic bullet. Those are your words, you’re the only one who took it to that extreme to, I’m guessing, prove some kind of point that was outside of this discussion.

But I certainly agree to completely disagree with your view that analytics should not be used and evaluations in person and on film is the only proper way to project a college player in to the NFL.

You claim I'm misquoting something, only to turn around and completely mischaracterize what I've said

Can you actually quote where I've said analytics shouldn't be used at all?

Hint: I haven't.

What I did say was in response to the suggestion that if we'd engaged in analytics we might not have messed up on Young and others, etc. 

Hence, why I pointed out to our sadly mistaken friend that we did.

[Mr. Scot]

On the actual topic...

 

[Martin]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You claim I'm misquoting something, only to turn around and completely mischaracterize what I've said

Can you actually quote where I've said analytics shouldn't be used at all?

Hint: I haven't.

What I did say was in response to the suggestion that if we'd engaged in analytics we might not have messed up on Young and others, etc. 

Hence, why I pointed out to our sadly mistaken friend that we did.

Hahaha, if you say so. Indirectly calling other people idiots for believing in analytics over and over makes it very clear where you stand.