Why analytics really liked the Cards draft

[football karma]

from the Ringer, on analytics, a good read overall on the factors in college that correlate to actual NFL success:

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2019/4/22/18510099/nfl-draft-analytics-player-tracking


two blurbs for Cardinal fans:

"PFF focuses on what are called “NFL throws,” which are exactly as they sound.......A deep post route into coverage separates Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes II from Blake Bortles.” Even though Mayfield and Mahomes didn’t have the highest volume of NFL throws during their college careers, they excelled at them. (PFF, by these metrics, loves Kyler Murray.)"


as for the 33rd pick:

Another thing PFF has found that relates to the draft is that highly graded coverage players are just as important, and perhaps more so, than highly graded pass rushers. Pass rush and coverage are correlated, but the direction arrow points more towards coverage helping pass rush more than the other way around.”

 

[bennyperrin23]

Great article! Loved it thanks.

 

[slanidrac16]

It almost makes it look like we know what we’re doing.

 

[Krangodnzr]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfl-is-drafting-quarterbacks-all-wrong/

 

[Ohcrap75]

I would love to think that the Cardinals have moved to the front of the class with analytics! Very good article and thanks for sharing! The last paragraph saying KC is a smart franchise and invests in the secondary over pass rushers was kind of funny, since they have recently traded away Peters, let Berry go and then traded and paid Frank Clark

 

[Krangodnzr]

I read something years ago and I wish I could find it now, but the article went back to the beginning of the Super Bowl era and showed that pass defense has ALWAYS been more important even when teams ran alot more often.

Super Bowl 1 Green Bay Packers didnt have an amazing run defense, but their pass defense was about the best in the league.

For the article they used a stat that was created and it was called passer rating differential and it was basically your teams ability to pass, minus your ability to stop the pass. The two best teams usually go deep in the playoffs.

 

[Garthshort]

Ohcrap, in business that's called an attention getter. The guy writing the article wanted to make sure, you're paying attention.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I would love to think that the Cardinals have moved to the front of the class with analytics! Very good article and thanks for sharing! The last paragraph saying KC is a smart franchise and invests in the secondary over pass rushers was kind of funny, since they have recently traded away Peters, let Berry go and then traded and paid Frank Clark

That's not what the article said, it said that the Chiefs are changing their focus by letting pass rushers go and replacing them with better pass defenders.

Marcus Peters has been the most overrated cornerback in the NFL since he came into the league.

PFF had a graphic from before last season that showed he had given up more yards than any CB in the league since he arrived. Sure he has had 7 interception years, but he gave up 15 TDs and 1500 yards.

 

[Chopper0080]

The importance of a pass defense is only highlighted if you have an offense that can out-execute the opposing offense. NE prioritizes the secondary because they believe they are able to execute extended scoring drives while other teams will not. It is essentially banking on the opposing offense creating negative plays which will stall out their drives.

 

[kerouac9]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfl-is-drafting-quarterbacks-all-wrong/

Oof. Josh Rosen had, based on my calculation, a -0.3 CPOE his last season at UCLA.

 

[Ohcrap75]

That's not what the article said, it said that the Chiefs are changing their focus by letting pass rushers go and replacing them with better pass defenders.

Marcus Peters has been the most overrated cornerback in the NFL since he came into the league.

PFF had a graphic from before last season that showed he had given up more yards than any CB in the league since he arrived. Sure he has had 7 interception years, but he gave up 15 TDs and 1500 yards.

You must be registered for see images attach

My statement was almost word for word with what they said. Not sure how I was wrong?

 

[Krangodnzr]

You must be registered for see images attach

My statement was almost word for word with what they said. Not sure how I was wrong?

Well they did let Houston and Dee Ford go, but yeah traded for Frank Clark.

Brought in Mathieu but let Berry go.

On further examination, yeah, I think it is a curious example.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Oof. Josh Rosen had, based on my calculation, a -0.3 CPOE his last season at UCLA.

IMO we many look back at the decision to draft Rosen as a gamble on a QBOF that didn't work out and the team quickly remedied that.

I know you aren't as hopeful about Murray as I am, but if he turns out to be a good QB and Rosen ends up being a league average QB, I think the Cardinals are going to be looked at more favorably for drafting Murray. Sure, you can can pan taking Rosen in the first place because there are/were indicators that he's not going to be a franchise QB, but I think if you don't have a QB, you do what you can to get one.

I know I've hammered on this point, but Haskins' 73 QB Rating under pressure is a huge red flag. Few QBs that aren't good under pressure end up being good. You can make the argument that he only started one year, so maybe if he starts his second year in college that he gets much better, but it's a big gamble at this point in time.

 

[kerouac9]

IMO we many look back at the decision to draft Rosen as a gamble on a QBOF that didn't work out and the team quickly remedied that.

I know you aren't as hopeful about Murray as I am, but if he turns out to be a good QB and Rosen ends up being a league average QB, I think the Cardinals are going to be looked at more favorably for drafting Murray. Sure, you can can pan taking Rosen in the first place because there are/were indicators that he's not going to be a franchise QB, but I think if you don't have a QB, you do what you can to get one.

I know I've hammered on this point, but Haskins' 73 QB Rating under pressure is a huge red flag. Few QBs that aren't good under pressure end up being good. You can make the argument that he only started one year, so maybe if he starts his second year in college that he gets much better, but it's a big gamble at this point in time.

I don't think there's much difference between a "good" QB and a "league average" QB. I think that Murray has to turn out to be a transcendent/elite QB for the Cards not to look foolish. The idea that Murray can end up somewhere between the 8th and 12th best QB in the league three years from now seems unlikely. He'll either be one of the five best or looking at baseball again.

IMO, Rosen is/was probably never going to be Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers (who had a +9 CPOE at Cal the year before he was drafted(!!)), but he could be like a better Kirk Cousins. The kind of guy who can support a very good defense and make the plays necessary to win games. He could've been a good QB for a Steve Wilks-style team. Or (maybe) a Brian Flores-style team.

We'll never know if he could be a good QB in a Kliff Kingsbury-style team, but I think you'd always wonder about the fit. We're not going to run a Pro Style offense, so we don't need a pro-style QB.

I don't know what the sample size is for either of those pressure stats for Murray or Haskins. I'm guessing they're pretty small, though.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

IMO we many look back at the decision to draft Rosen as a gamble on a QBOF that didn't work out and the team quickly remedied that.

I know you aren't as hopeful about Murray as I am, but if he turns out to be a good QB and Rosen ends up being a league average QB, I think the Cardinals are going to be looked at more favorably for drafting Murray. Sure, you can can pan taking Rosen in the first place because there are/were indicators that he's not going to be a franchise QB, but I think if you don't have a QB, you do what you can to get one.

I know I've hammered on this point, but Haskins' 73 QB Rating under pressure is a huge red flag. Few QBs that aren't good under pressure end up being good. You can make the argument that he only started one year, so maybe if he starts his second year in college that he gets much better, but it's a big gamble at this point in time.

Agree, mainly because "good" QB play is at such a premium in the NFL.

 

[WildBB]

Another thing PFF has found that relates to the draft is that highly graded coverage players are just as important, and perhaps more so, than highly graded pass rushers. Pass rush and coverage are correlated, but the direction arrow points more towards coverage helping pass rush more than the other way around.”

Surprising because secondaries are very hamstrung by present rules today. I think that's why blitzing has taken on so much significance by the D coordinators. Or just to mask individual coverage liabilities?

 

[Krangodnzr]

I don't think there's much difference between a "good" QB and a "league average" QB. I think that Murray has to turn out to be a transcendent/elite QB for the Cards not to look foolish. The idea that Murray can end up somewhere between the 8th and 12th best QB in the league three years from now seems unlikely. He'll either be one of the five best or looking at baseball again.

IMO, Rosen is/was probably never going to be Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers (who had a +9 CPOE at Cal the year before he was drafted(!!)), but he could be like a better Kirk Cousins. The kind of guy who can support a very good defense and make the plays necessary to win games. He could've been a good QB for a Steve Wilks-style team. Or (maybe) a Brian Flores-style team.

We'll never know if he could be a good QB in a Kliff Kingsbury-style team, but I think you'd always wonder about the fit. We're not going to run a Pro Style offense, so we don't need a pro-style QB.

I don't know what the sample size is for either of those pressure stats for Murray or Haskins. I'm guessing they're pretty small, though.

I think the difference in league average and "good" is hard to quantify.

I've seen enough bad QBs play for the Cardinals that I don't really care that the team got pennies on the dollar for Rosen.

If you look at the numbers fivethirtyeight is throwing out there, the probability that Murray is going to be successful is pretty high. Sure they were wrong on Manziel, but their metric successfully identifies multiple really good QBs.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Surprising because secondaries are very hamstrung by present rules today. I think that's why blitzing has taken on so much significance by the D coordinators. Or just to mask individual coverage liabilities?

They are....which is why having good cornerbacks is even more important.

40 years ago, bad cornerbacks could just mug receivers over and over and get away with it.

 

[kerouac9]

I think the difference in league average and "good" is hard to quantify.

I've seen enough bad QBs play for the Cardinals that I don't really care that the team got pennies on the dollar for Rosen.

If you look at the numbers fivethirtyeight is throwing out there, the probability that Murray is going to be successful is pretty high. Sure they were wrong on Manziel, but their metric successfully identifies multiple really good QBs.

I mean, they built a model that has a forward-looking predictive sample size of 0. In back-testing, their analysis looks REALLY GOOD. But guess what? Back-testing always looks good because you choose your sample size and designed your model with the benefit of hindsight. I work in finance and I see this all the time.

I generally trust the editorial process of fivethirtyeight, but their sample list of QBs doesn't make a lot of intuitive sense to me. Why only include those guys? Why not show all of your work?

I'll trust QBASE for now, which suggests that Murray has some obstacle to overcome to be better than Rosen.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I'll trust QBASE for now, which suggests that Murray has some obstacle to overcome to be better than Rosen.

Their (Rosen and Murray) QBASE was very similar....even though QBASE heavily penalizes Murray for only one year as a starter and purportedly having a great supporting cast (which remains to be seen). Looking at Andrew Luck was interesting, because I wonder how much they penalized him for having a great supporting cast, because looking back years later, Luck had a TON of good NFL players playing around him at Stanford. So maybe that penalty hasn't been applied to Luck, because at the time, his supporting cast wasn't viewed like it would it be now.

I don't think that Murray's performance would suddenly have dipped dramatically if he had one more year of eligibility and played one more season. Some of these historical norms are changing or are being slowly proven to be biases. One thing to consider, is that while their are plenty of smart people working in NFL front offices, there are a lot more dumb jocks.

 

[kerouac9]

Their (Rosen and Murray) QBASE was very similar....even though QBASE heavily penalizes Murray for only one year as a starter and purportedly having a great supporting cast (which remains to be seen). Looking at Andrew Luck was interesting, because I wonder how much they penalized him for having a great supporting cast, because looking back years later, Luck had a TON of good NFL players playing around him at Stanford. So maybe that penalty hasn't been applied to Luck, because at the time, his supporting cast wasn't viewed like it would it be now.

I don't think that Murray's performance would suddenly have dipped dramatically if he had one more year of eligibility and played one more season. Some of these historical norms are changing or are being slowly proven to be biases. One thing to consider, is that while their are plenty of smart people working in NFL front offices, there are a lot more dumb jocks.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2015/introducing-qbase

QBASE didn't exist in 2012, but the backtested turned out to be EXTREMELY skeptical of Andrew Luck.

This is their at-the-time analysis of Luck: https://www.footballoutsiders.com/nfl-draft/2012/lewin-career-forecast-2012

That said, the Back-tested QBASE liked Andrew Luck twice as much as Murray (not counting rushing for either).

 

[cardncubfan]

COLLEGE STATS
NAME CPOE
Russell Wilson +16
Johnny Manziel +9
Jameis Winston +8
Kellen Moore +10
Deshaun Watson +5
Sam Darnold +5
Matt Barkley +4
Jared Goff +1
Kevin Hogan +4
Marcus Mariota +4
Kirk Cousins +4
Paxton Lynch +2
Geno Smith +3
Nathan Peterman +1
Zach Mettenberger +4
Trevor Siemian 0
Matt McGloin -2
Blake Bortles +4
Lamar Jackson 0