The Cleveland Browns are making a bold organizational move. They are going all in on using analytics to drive their personnel decisions. Look at what they are doing in their front office, who they are putting in charge and how they are structuring their hierarchy. I know next to nothing about how analytics are used in pro football. Baseball has been using them for a while and they are just as important, if not more so, than scouting in many organizations. For example, the new Reds GM put in place to succeed Walt is a big analytics guy. The NBA has been getting on the anayltics bus over the past few years. Now the NFL is jumping in.

 

Does anyone know what statistics are used in pro football?

 

What drives analytic decisions in pro football?

 

Let's talk pro football analytics and how they are used.

I bet football is going to be too complex to apply analytics. Its not like baseball where you can accumulate pitcher vs hitter data. If a QB throws a pick because the receiver is not where he is supposed to be, that is accessed to QBR, while the receiver has no statistical impact.

It can be used. It can't be the end-all-be-all.

 

It has a lot of value and should be part of the eval process vs the eyeball test/gut feel.

 

Lastly, it cannot hurt the Browns.

I don't know much about football analytics, but I know the Kansas City Royals were in the World Series this year. Considering how the Royals have been bad since I started following baseball, I think last year's performance says SOMETHING about analytics. It'll be interesting to see if it translates to football. I'd bet in 10 years or so more teams will be using them.

I don't know much about football analytics, but I know the Kansas City Royals were in the World Series this year. Considering how the Royals have been bad since I started following baseball, I think last year's performance says SOMETHING about analytics. It'll be interesting to see if it translates to football. I'd bet in 10 years or so more teams will be using them.

 

Are the Royals practicioners of analytics?

The Cleveland Browns are making a bold organizational move. They are going all in on using analytics to drive their personnel decisions. Look at what they are doing in their front office, who they are putting in charge and how they are structuring their hierarchy. I know next to nothing about how analytics are used in pro football. Baseball has been using them for a while and they are just as important, if not more so, than scouting in many organizations. For example, the new Reds GM put in place to succeed Walt is a big analytics guy. The NBA has been getting on the analytics bus over the past few years. Now the NFL is jumping in.

 

Does anyone know what statistics are used in pro football?

 

What drives analytic decisions in pro football?

 

Let's talk pro football analytics and how they are used.

 

I saw this yesterday and thought about posting on it.

 

My first thought was with Collinsworth taking over Pro Football Focus we are going to see a lot more analytics mentioned/involved with the NFL and we have already. For example, I believe it was Chucky that had his DL comparison chart during the Bengals/Broncos game where he broke down much more than just sacks and tackles for defensive lineman.

 

Frankly this is something that has been 20 years overdue in the NFL. Just like in hoops, lots of things don't show up in the box score, but that is only because the box score is far too basic.

 

Just spitballing here because I have no idea, but this is probably the NFL learning a little bit from the Madden gaming series.

I think almost every team in baseball uses analytics on some level. Yes the Royals use a great deal of analytics in roster formation and strategy

Are the Royals practicioners of analytics?

 

While they may buy into analytics some, I wouldn't go so far as to say they are a true analytics/sabermetric team. Ned Yost doesn't exactly manage like an analytics guy....base stealing, bunting, lack of walks/plate discipline, etc aren't exactly cornerstones of the analytic movement.

I'm taking the wait and see approach. I think any team would be foolish not to use every tool available to it, but I'm skeptical there's a sea-change awaiting the NFL in terms of how we evaluate players.

 

My main reason for skepticism is that there isn't nearly the amount of data in football that there is in baseball or basketball. On one hand, anything can be data, from age, height, college, 40 time, vertical jump, shoe size, whatever. On the other hand, you need a variable that defines success where you can see how all of the information you have impacts it, whether this is wins, touchdowns, interceptions, tackles, or whatever.

 

The problems are that you only have 16 regular season games in the NFL compared to 162 in baseball and 82 in basketball (this impacts your ability to be confident that any correlation you find is solid and not mere chance) and that there just aren't many ways of objectively measuring output in the NFL. It's obvious in baseball: There's no way to fudge batting average, on base percentage, RBIs, etc. and every player has a collection of these stats to compare. In football, outside of the quarterback, there just aren't many of these measures available. On top of this, football is more of a team sport in the sense that the performance of a unit of players can drastically impact the output of individual players (imagine an average safety who makes lots of interceptions because the defensive line effectively rushes the quarterback versus a very good safety who is constantly up against quarterbacks who have all day to find windows).

 

At the end of the day, I'm intrigued by what can be done with it, but I don't anticipate a "Moneyball" style revolution where old fogey scouts are forced to reckon with a more objective way of measuring performance and potential, largely because I don't know that this objectivity exists yet.

I'm taking the wait and see approach. I think any team would be foolish not to use every tool available to it, but I'm skeptical there's a sea-change awaiting the NFL in terms of how we evaluate players.

 

My main reason for skepticism is that there isn't nearly the amount of data in football that there is in baseball or basketball. On one hand, anything can be data, from age, height, college, 40 time, vertical jump, shoe size, whatever. On the other hand, you need a variable that defines success where you can see how all of the information you have impacts it, whether this is wins, touchdowns, interceptions, tackles, or whatever.

 

The problems are that you only have 16 regular season games in the NFL compared to 162 in baseball and 82 in basketball (this impacts your ability to be confident that any correlation you find is solid and not mere chance) and that there just aren't many ways of objectively measuring output in the NFL. It's obvious in baseball: There's no way to fudge batting average, on base percentage, RBIs, etc. and every player has a collection of these stats to compare. In football, outside of the quarterback, there just aren't many of these measures available. On top of this, football is more of a team sport in the sense that the performance of a unit of players can drastically impact the output of individual players (imagine an average safety who makes lots of interceptions because the defensive line effectively rushes the quarterback versus a very good safety who is constantly up against quarterbacks who have all day to find windows).

 

At the end of the day, I'm intrigued by what can be done with it, but I don't anticipate a "Moneyball" style revolution where old fogey scouts are forced to reckon with a more objective way of measuring performance and potential, largely because I don't know that this objectivity exists yet.

 

Great stuff like always Habib.

 

To the objectivity, I partly agree. However, I think the idea is to do what ProFootballFocus.com does it, for example PFF:

 

1. Analyst grades every single player and every single play.

2. Second analyst reviews the first one.

3. Third analyst reviews the second one.

4. Pro Coach Network verifies the three analysts grades.

5. Advanced Normalization: The raw grades (as seen in our Premium Stats) are normalized to better account for the situation; this ranges from where the player lined up to the drop-back depth of the quarterback, to everything in between.

6. We set the grade. Convert to 1-100 scale.

 

And finally:

 

GOING BEYOND THE STATS - OUR GRADING SYSTEM IS CONCERNED WITH HOW A PLAYER PERFORMED ON A PARTICULAR PLAY, NOT THE OUTCOME OF THAT PLAY.

 

For example, if a quarterback hits a wide receiver perfectly in stride on a post route in between two defenders, and the receiver drops the ball, it goes down in the box score as an incompletion. But in our system, that quarterback receives a positive grade for making a great throw. His statistics should not be punished based on the fact that his receiver dropped a pass.

 

Our detailed analysis starts by adding to the base statistics with critical information, including the depth of the drop by the quarterback, the intended and actual point of attack on a run play, and the hang-time of punts and kickoffs on special teams.

 

We then add to this with a level of detail that surpasses any other data source: the grading of each player on a play-by-play basis to judge how each player has executed his assignment on a given play.

 

This in-depth grading allows us to judge player performance in every facet of the game before compiling individual plays into an overall grade for each player by game, by season, and beyond. As a result, we can show things like how two edge defenders may have the same overall grade, but one is a significantly better run defender while the other is significantly more disruptive as a pass-rusher.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/how-we-grade/

 

====================

 

In other words, like you I don't see Moneyball revolution but I definitely see a lot of objectivity in the process.

I bet football is going to be too complex to apply analytics. Its not like baseball where you can accumulate pitcher vs hitter data. If a QB throws a pick because the receiver is not where he is supposed to be, that is accessed to QBR, while the receiver has no statistical impact.

 

Yet.

Great stuff like always Habib.

 

To the objectivity, I partly agree. However, I think the idea is to do what ProFootballFocus.com does it, for example PFF:

 

That's definitely their value to all of this. They are producing something that can be used as a more universal success metric. The reason I'm still reserved about it is that they are essentially taking the "eye-ball test" and turning it into a number. And there isn't anything wrong with that at all. It's a perfectly legitimate way of doing this. But, there's still an element of human bias at the root of it.

That's definitely their value to all of this. They are producing something that can be used as a more universal success metric. The reason I'm still reserved about it is that they are essentially taking the "eye-ball test" and turning it into a number. And there isn't anything wrong with that at all. It's a perfectly legitimate way of doing this. But, there's still an element of human bias at the root of it.

 

Agree, but that eye ball test is four levels deep and set up (I strongly assume) to make it as accurate as possible. In other words, I think the human bias factor is nearly non-relevant when you are rated by multiple parties and rated on an average of 500 or so plays a year, if not a lot more in many cases.

It can be used. It can't be the end-all-be-all.

 

It has a lot of value and should be part of the eval process vs the eyeball test/gut feel.

 

Lastly, it cannot hurt the Browns.

 

And the Browns take a backhand to the face from Clyde :lol2:

 

I don't know much about football analytics, but I know the Kansas City Royals were in the World Series this year. Considering how the Royals have been bad since I started following baseball, I think last year's performance says SOMETHING about analytics. It'll be interesting to see if it translates to football. I'd bet in 10 years or so more teams will be using them.

 

I wonder if they checked the Royals' computer system for pine tar.

 

On another note, I'm not sure how this will workout for the Browns but I heard they have a 7.67432% chance of a playoff birth within 5 years.

Agree, but that eye ball test is four levels deep and set up (I strongly assume) to make it as accurate as possible. In other words, I think the human bias factor is nearly non-relevant when you are rated by multiple parties and rated on an average of 500 or so plays a year, if not a lot more in many cases.

 

I would say they are trying to mitigate biases, but I don't think they can be gotten rid of.

 

There are basically two major ways of doing what they are doing: You get a bunch of experts to provide a score for each player, then you average out the scores (a consensus score of experts would mitigate against individual biases or outliers) or you create very comprehensive and rigid parameters for how to score each position (this means there are fewer "judgement" calls, but it's influenced by both who is applying the parameters and who devised them, which is where the human factor comes in).

 

It's not clear to me which they are doing (it sort of sounds like a mix of both), but the point is their final number is unique to PFF and a different group might come up with a different number altogether. I'd wager a guess that if you ranked quarterbacks according to QBR and to PFF grades each week they would be different.