Football, like other sports, is results driven. There are intangible and tangible reasons players perform, as well as, teams.

 

Gladwell has written a piece about athletes choking. Basically he tries to discover why some athletes like kickers in football, shooters in basketball, etc. perform at crunch time and others don't. These are my examples and not Gladwell's, but you get the point.

 

It gets down to the percentage of players where you can use their stats against those times when they go outside the norm. Finding those players that have "it" is critical in big time situations, but are they consistent over the long haul.

 

Then you factor in all the team stuff and putting values on positions, it is much more complicated than baseball.

 

I am convinced it can be done. If I owned a team, I would explore itto its fullest.

I think it could be useful but just not sure how useful it could be. I'm not sure it would work at all for drafting because there are so many more variables in the college game.

 

Maybe it could be somewhat useful in a team deciding on which of their free agents to re-sign and which to let go because a team would have consistently applied analytics to each player and know what factors to "normalize". But even then other factors like age and salary would be more prominent.

I really like what the NFL did with the rookie salary cap a few years back. I am not exactly sure how that fits in this mix other than the allocation of resources.

 

Moving on, I think the analytics are great for teams to use with their own players and potential free agents. With their own players, I think it is a great metric for teams/coaches to say "here are the facts" you tell me how you can be a better player/teammate.

 

Where I think you make the strongest point, and where the analytics will really help, is drafting college players beyond the second round. If there is a secret analytical formula for late round draft picks that is where a team can turn the tide.

 

*cough* Tom Brady *cough*

Joe Banner, speaking on an ESPN roundtable gave the example that analytics show that the team that is leading at halftime by a certain amount (I don't remember the exact differential) wins 70+% of the time. He said that indicates that you should come out with an aggressive offensive attack in the first half to get a lead by half. I would add that it may show that teams who choose to defer the kick-off may be shooting themselves in the foot if Joe Banner's analysis is correct.

 

A simple example where analytics come in to play supplied by Banner was regarding pass rushers. He said that if you want a pass rusher, he has to be able to run "the 10" in 1.6 sec. or less or he won't be very productive at rushing the passer in the NFL. Most teams in the NFL don't know this, says Banner. They use other factors when looking for pass rushers but their speed in "the 10" is one of the more significant factors in whether they will be successful. Analytics shows you which event or measurement at the Combine correlates most significantly to success in the NFL. They can do this position-by-position.

 

One analytic that goes against current wisdom, according to Banner, is their studies show that arm-length did not significantly matter with regards to Offensive Lineman. Current wisdom in the NFL places a lot of significance on arm length for Offensive Lineman. He said that he could not get one coach from three different staffs to believe what the analytics said.

 

There are sooo many uses for analytics in the NFL. All that it does is provide information on tendencies. It is up to the coaching staff to figure out how to utilize that information to put the best personnel on the field and to place them in the best situation to win games. Winning still requires an excellent coach.

Joe Banner, speaking on an ESPN roundtable gave the example that analytics show that the team that is leading at halftime by a certain amount (I don't remember the exact differential) wins 70+% of the time. He said that indicates that you should come out with an aggressive offensive attack in the first half to get a lead by half. I would add that it may show that teams who choose to defer the kick-off may be shooting themselves in the foot if Joe Banner's analysis is correct.

 

A simple example where analytics come in to play supplied by Banner was regarding pass rushers. He said that if you want a pass rusher, he has to be able to run "the 10" in 1.6 sec. or less or he won't be very productive at rushing the passer in the NFL. Most teams in the NFL don't know this, says Banner. They use other factors when looking for pass rushers but their speed in "the 10" is one of the more significant factors in whether they will be successful. Analytics shows you which event or measurement at the Combine correlates most significantly to success in the NFL. They can do this position-by-position.

 

One analytic that goes against current wisdom, according to Banner, is their studies show that arm-length did not significantly matter with regards to Offensive Lineman. Current wisdom in the NFL places a lot of significance on arm length for Offensive Lineman. He said that he could not get one coach from three different staffs to believe what the analytics said.

 

There are sooo many uses for analytics in the NFL. All that it does is provide information on tendencies. It is up to the coaching staff to figure out how to utilize that information to put the best personnel on the field and to place them in the best situation to win games. Winning still requires an excellent coach.

 

This is the sort of thing I was hoping to see. Seems interesting, especially the 1.6 second 10 (yards?) for pass rushers. I'd be curious to see their "work" behind it, but I suppose they keep that sort of thing secret.

Me too.

 

Think how much analytics will change draft day coverage.