2021 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

[Cowboysrock55]

You offered up receptions as an example of a useless stat. It is far, far, far from a useless stat.

I disagree, I do think it's useless. Because yards is a far superior stat and makes receptions useless. A reception by itself is actually useless. Unless it has the yards with it.

Sort of like carries. Carries is a useless stat unless it comes with yards...

The only thing those tell you alone is if a coach likes you.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Conversely I think receiving yards are way more important. If a guy catches 1 ball for 15 yards and another catches 2 balls for 10. The guy with the 15 yard catch did something more difficult and productive.

I think the opposite is kind of true.

Raw yards are important.

But imagine the guy with a 15 yard catch got a first down.

Now imagine the 2 catches were both 1st downs (both 2nd or 3rd and 5 or whatever). Aren't those 2 first downs more important than the 1?

Now imagine all three catches went for TDs.

Still think that 1 catch was more important than the 2? Because it would be ridiculous to value 1 TD over 2 just because the 1 went for more yards. (Keep in mind context matters much more in small sample sizes. We've all seen 1 or 2 yard plays that were in context more impressive than a 50 yard wide open defensive breakdown, and of course vise versa.)

Let's extrapolate this over the course of a season.

Let's take a guy who has 20 YPC, which is very good.

Let's say he has 50 catches on the season. That gives him 1000 yards. Nice.

Now let's say player B has 100 receptions, which is very good.

And player B averages 7.5 YPC. That gives him only 750 yards. Not great.

Let's say both players got a first down on 80% of their catches.

Player A had 40 first downs.

Player B got 80 first downs.

Suddenly those 100 catches aren't so useless. You are extending drives much more often with the 100 catch guy than you are with the 1000 yard guy in this scenario.

Both are useful don't get me wrong.

There's a reason #1 receivers are almost always high reception guys much more than high YPC guys. Think Irvin vs Harper.

The DeSean Jackson types are valuable, but Welker >>>>> Jackson.

Keep in mind these are extreme examples to make a point. Great receivers tend to have both high receptions and high yards. And I'm not making the argument that a guy with 7.5 ypc is particularly good.

But I am making the argument that receptions are not useless. Far from it.

Guys with a lot of catches over and over and over again are obviously getting open over and over and over again. That's actually really important.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I disagree, I do think it's useless. Because yards is a far superior stat and makes receptions useless. A reception by itself is actually useless. Unless it has the yards with it.

Sort of like carries. Carries is a useless stat unless it comes with yards...

The only thing those tell you alone is if a coach likes you.

How many receptions go for zero yards? Almost none.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

How many receptions go for zero yards? Almost none.

In 2019 2.7% of completions led to zero or negative yards. I wouldn't call that insignificant.

Guy catches a bublescreen and is tackled immediately. You look at the stat sheet and clap. I look at the stat sheet and say it was worthless.

Guy catches a bubble screen and goes 50 yards, I say great. The difference is the yards. The consistent is the catch.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think the opposite is kind of true.

Raw yards are important.

But imagine the guy with a 15 yard catch got a first down.

Now imagine the 2 catches were both 1st downs (both 2nd or 3rd and 5 or whatever). Aren't those 2 first downs more important than the 1?

Now imagine all three catches went for TDs.

Still think that 1 catch was more important than the 2? Because it would be ridiculous to value 1 TD over 2 just because the 1 went for more yards. (Keep in mind context matters much more in small sample sizes. We've all seen 1 or 2 yard plays that were in context more impressive than a 50 yard wide open defensive breakdown, and of course vise versa.)

Let's extrapolate this over the course of a season.

Let's take a guy who has 20 YPC, which is very good.

Let's say he has 50 catches on the season. That gives him 1000 yards. Nice.

Now let's say player B has 100 receptions, which is very good.

And player B averages 7.5 YPC. That gives him only 750 yards. Not great.

Let's say both players got a first down on 80% of their catches.

Player A had 40 first downs.

Player B got 80 first downs.

Suddenly those 100 catches aren't so useless. You are extending drives much more often with the 100 catch guy than you are with the 1000 yard guy in this scenario.

Both are useful don't get me wrong.

There's a reason #1 receivers are almost always high reception guys much more than high YPC guys. Think Irvin vs Harper.

The DeSean Jackson types are valuable, but Welker >>>>> Jackson.

Keep in mind these are extreme examples to make a point. Great receivers tend to have both high receptions and high yards. And I'm not making the argument that a guy with 7.5 ypc is particularly good.

But I am making the argument that receptions are not useless. Far from it.

Guys with a lot of catches over and over and over again are obviously getting open over and over and over again. That's actually really important.

I guess all of this kind of points out what I'm getting at. You have to give an important stat to justify the reception being meaningful. TDs, First downs, yards are all important stats. Without the addition of those the reception is useless.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I guess all of this kind of points out what I'm getting at. You have to give an important stat to justify the reception being meaningful. TDs, First downs, yards are all important stats. Without the addition of those the reception is useless.

Without receptions you don't get first downs, TDs, etc.

 

[Genghis Khan]

In 2019 2.7% of completions led to zero or negative yards. I wouldn't call that insignificant.

Guy catches a bublescreen and is tackled immediately. You look at the stat sheet and clap. I look at the stat sheet and say it was worthless.

Guy catches a bubble screen and goes 50 yards, I say great. The difference is the yards. The consistent is the catch.

So 97.3 % of receptions gained yardage? Cool.

 

[data]

real world example...who’d you rather have as your #1?

Receiver A: 125 rec, 1405 yards (11.2 YPC)
Receiver B: 87 rec, 1646 yards (18.9 YPC)

* both seasons occurred within last ten years

 

[Genghis Khan]

real world example...who’d you rather have as your #1?

Receiver A: 125 rec, 1405 yards (11.2 YPC)
Receiver B: 87 rec, 1646 yards (18.9 YPC)

* both seasons occurred within last ten years

The real answer is either. Both are great.

I'd lean towards A though.

 

[p1_]

The real answer is either. Both are great.

I'd lean towards A though.

Why A?

 

[data]

The real answer is either. Both are great.

I'd lean towards A though.

taking the 21st century real world examples a step further...

Receiver A: 107 rec, 1023 yards (9.6 YPC)
Receiver B: 60 rec, 1257 yards (21.0 YPC)

 

[Genghis Khan]

Why A?

38 more catches while averaging more than a first down per catch is pretty valuable.

 

[Genghis Khan]

taking the 21st century real world examples a step further...

Receiver A: 107 rec, 1023 yards (9.6 YPC)
Receiver B: 60 rec, 1257 yards (21.0 YPC)

That's a lot harder. Probably B. Averaging less than 10 yards per catch is a little rough when you factor in the inherent dangers of passing the ball. I'd want to know more context though, like number of targets.

 

[data]

That's a lot harder. Probably B. Averaging less than 10 yards per catch is a little rough when you factor in the inherent dangers of passing the ball. I'd want to know more context though, like number of targets.

This second example’s stats came from receivers where they were the only 1,000 yards WR for their team.

Receiver A had 150 targets
Receiver B had 98 targets

 

[Genghis Khan]

This second example’s stats came from receivers where they were the only 1,000 yards WR for their team.

Receiver A had 150 targets
Receiver B had 98 targets

Interesting. Player A is more efficient- 71% to 61%.

If player A had maybe 1 more YPC I'd probably take him.

I do think it is close but I'm not in love with WRs who average less than 10 YPC.

Still give me player B in this case.

It's not all about receptions as I said before. But i do think they are pretty valuable.

 

[data]

Still give me player B in this case.

It's not all about receptions as I said before. But i do think they are pretty valuable.

Really? Not looking at Targets (ie Catch %), you’re comparing 60 vs 107 receptions. Imagine having a #1 WR that averages less than 4 catches a game. In a four-game stretch, that’s 4 + 4 + 4 + 3 receptions.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

So 97.3 % of receptions gained yardage? Cool.

Sure could be 1 yard, 2 yards, 3 yards...

 

[Cowboysrock55]

real world example...who’d you rather have as your #1?

Receiver A: 125 rec, 1405 yards (11.2 YPC)
Receiver B: 87 rec, 1646 yards (18.9 YPC)

* both seasons occurred within last ten years

B is way more impressive to me assuming TDs are close.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

38 more catches while averaging more than a first down per catch is pretty valuable.

The other guy averages 2 first downs with a catch...

I'm not sure why you'd prefer at least two passes to accomplish what you can in one. All you did was double your risk of a sack, fumble, INT or something else bad happening.

 

[boozeman]

Prescott
Lamb
Martin
Collins
Gallup
Elliott
T. Smith

Lawrence
Diggs
Gregory
Uh...that is all I got