Cardinal Moneyball

[desertdawg]

I just barely caught the flick with Brad Pitt and it got me thinking. Does a formula like this already exist in the NFL?
Are there singular talents out there that can be bought dirt cheap and implemented to obtain certain results? Money Mike is one of our biggest contributers, we benefit every week with him on the field but he will never get that street cred nation wide, even after pimp slapping the Packer in the play offs. Special inexpensive players.

Let's say a #3 wide receiver that collects the most P.I. calls. A inferior defensive lineman that gets the O-line guy to jump...weekly, resulting in that false start. A washed up runningback that provides the best pass pro/blocking for our QBs ( QBs plural ). A running back that can identify the blitz quicker than our QB, the crusty Taylor (although cheap) was not that type of back, Beanie blocked better.

O-line, how about a guy that can only pass block, bring him in everytime Whiz wants to go shotgun, it's already predictable, might as well get the best protection we can on those 20 + plays per game!

 

[Duckjake]

I don't know if that can be done in football Dawg. Baseball is far more plug and play. There are no new schemes or terminologies to learn when a player moves from one baseball team to another like when changing football teams.

The pitchers throw the same pitches, the hitters have the same tendencies, a ground ball is a ground ball. There are some things that are unique to each stadium and changing leagues can be more of a challenge but nothing like switching NFL teams.

I like the idea but I just don't know if it would work in the NFL. Especially with the hurry up offenses making it more difficult to substitute.

 

[Chopper0080]

I just barely caught the flick with Brad Pitt and it got me thinking. Does a formula like this already exist in the NFL?
Are there singular talents out there that can be bought dirt cheap and implemented to obtain certain results? Money Mike is one of our biggest contributers, we benefit every week with him on the field but he will never get that street cred nation wide, even after pimp slapping the Packer in the play offs. Special inexpensive players.

Let's say a #3 wide receiver that collects the most P.I. calls. A inferior defensive lineman that gets the O-line guy to jump...weekly, resulting in that false start. A washed up runningback that provides the best pass pro/blocking for our QBs ( QBs plural ). A running back that can identify the blitz quicker than our QB, the crusty Taylor (although cheap) was not that type of back, Beanie blocked better.

O-line, how about a guy that can only pass block, bring him in everytime Whiz wants to go shotgun, it's already predictable, might as well get the best protection we can on those 20 + plays per game!

I think that you get a bit of it from certain teams w/ certain schemes. For years the Steelers were one of the few teams to run a 3-4 scheme and so they were able to draft their personnel later because those players did not fit other teams schemes.

The same has gone for the Colts. They have been able to ignore their offensive line for years because Peyton does such a good job of getting rid of the football and not taking hits.

The Saints do it with their wide receivers, as do the Patriots. They have invested money into the cheaper TE position and used it to reduce their need for traditionally premier perimeter players.

The Eagles and Giants both skimp on their LBer positions because their scheme puts more emphasis on the DLine and DSecondary.

 

[SuperSpck]

The Broncos did something like that at the height of the Shanny system too. Get undervalued Olinemen and RBs, teach them a scheme their bodies are suited for, and watch 'em blossom.

 

[john h]

I don't know if that can be done in football Dawg. Baseball is far more plug and play. There are no new schemes or terminologies to learn when a player moves from one baseball team to another like when changing football teams.

The pitchers throw the same pitches, the hitters have the same tendencies, a ground ball is a ground ball. There are some things that are unique to each stadium and changing leagues can be more of a challenge but nothing like switching NFL teams.

I like the idea but I just don't know if it would work in the NFL. Especially with the hurry up offenses making it more difficult to substitute.

I would suspect that many teams have some computer programs to evaluate players in many ways. If we can send a man to the moon it should be a piece of cake for scientist to develop very useful programs to assist in judging football players. If some team does not do that it would likely be the Cards due to their history of not spending money. I have watched on TV some of the computer labs evaluating players Independence of any particular team. With all the data available on players and even film which can be broken down into computer data it would be very unusual for a computer program is not used in assisting the drafting or trading of players. When you invest hundreds of millions of dollars in these transactions it would seem a must. The Cards would likely buy such information from the outside and not develop their own programs due to cost but the big boys probably have in house computer specialist who develop programs and change them on the fly and keep them updated with injuries, etc. I bet Kiper has his own computer evaluation program. Vegas certainly has a computer program that allows them to llook at teams, make the latest inputs before they put out the odds on games. No small group of men could do this without the help of a computer.

If we can have an unmanned shuttle blast off and go to a given point in space, gather data and pictures and then return and land on a dime we surely can gather a good program for evaluating football players.

Just remember E=MC squared and there may be a parallel universe where the Cards always win.

 

[Duckjake]

The Broncos did something like that at the height of the Shanny system too. Get undervalued Olinemen and RBs, teach them a scheme their bodies are suited for, and watch 'em blossom.

Baseball teams do that when they look at free agents in the minor leagues who are trapped behind star players with the Parent club.

But I think Dawg was talking about situational guys not undervalued players like the Broncos were using. Like in baseball where a team has a relief pitcher whose is really good at getting out left handed batters in late innings and that is his only role with the team.

 

[Mulli]

Great. Another way of Cards to be cheap and not win anything doing it.



Moneyball overrated.

 

[john h]

Saints & Technology

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/new-orleans-saints-embrace-player-evaluation-technology-022811

 

[ajcardfan]

As an A's fan, I hate the Moneyball system. Yeah, one half of it is finding cheap talent that can produce under certain parameters and the A's have been pretty good at that. But, the other half is letting go of talent that is expensive.

Go up and down the rosters of MLB teams and on almost every single one you can find players let go of by the A's. Take all of those players and put them on a roster and you would have a dominant team. They did it again this year, letting go of some very good pitchers.

 

[Mulli]

As an A's fan, I hate the Moneyball system. Yeah, one half of it is finding cheap talent that can produce under certain parameters and the A's have been pretty good at that. But, the other half is letting go of talent that is expensive.

Go up and down the rosters of MLB teams and on almost every single one you can find players let go of by the A's. Take all of those players and put them on a roster and you would have a dominant team. They did it again this year, letting go of some very good pitchers.

Seriously. Give me one reason why anyone would want season tickets to the A's this year. And maybe they should stop trading with the Rockies.

 

[football karma]

I think moneyball concepts are applied in the NFL: the Pats kicked it off years ago when they signed like two dozen journeyman NFL vets and went to the Superbowl.

The Eagles and Steelers also apply the concept of not getting emotionally attached to fan favorite, high priced vets and letting guys go when they have up and coming / cheaper talent ready to step in.


That being said -- the Pats and Eagles will also splurge on free agents when they feel like it -- so it isnt all about winning as economically as possible.

 

[Bodha]

As far as money Mike goes, hes one of our biggest pains.


Every so often he makes a great play. More often than not the opposing QB puts 400 yards on his head.

 

[crisper57]

Moneyball basically focused on the offensive output of players. It basically took guys with certain offensive talents and inserted them into the lineup, regardless of their defensive capabilities.

Football would be nearly impossible to replicate because the positions are so highly specialized. You can still get good value from guys within their positions, though.

 

[Mulli]

One might contend that the Cards have already been trying moneyball. Getting rid of young talent when their time for a larger contract comes
(too many examples to list).

Bringing in older talent to try to catch light in a bottle (too many examples to list).
This been happening my whole life.

 

[SuperSpck]

Moneyball basically focused on the offensive output of players. It basically took guys with certain offensive talents and inserted them into the lineup, regardless of their defensive capabilities.

Let's modify it for football then.
Specifically a 3-4 defensive end.

What are a list of talents you look for in a 3-4 end?
Make a thorough list and let's see if we can find some VORP-like stats that may get overlooked for sacks.

 

[CardsFan88]

There is not such a thing in baseball let alone football.

There are formulas that sometimes work, luckily or not. Ones that may show a guy is this or that, but how that comes together as a team (like Snyder and the skins) is another story.

People have to understand, soon, that statistics, formulas, models, are all guesses. There is no 'science' in them. They in fact don't even give an answer. Just a suggestion, that may or may not be right.

Sabermetrics is bs. Anyone that comes up with one for football, will be the sole proprietor of snake oil sophistry.

Even things like ERA is subjective, given the era. Was it deadball? Expansion? DH? Steroids?

I have nothing against the movie. I've been planning on watching it. It's probably a good movie.

It's nice to see people trying something to get better. But overall, there is no magic formula that tells you what baseball or football player is. There also, never will be.

Not in any sport. Any business venture. Any anything. Math tricks are just that tricks. Just look at our banks, it's all they are, and just like in all of these things, people should realize that math tricks, don't tell you much of anything.

They either accurately describe everything perfect, or it is nothing more than coincidence. 0 or 1. There is no inbetween.

If you believe otherwise, you believe that a woman can be .95 pregnant.

Just because a team made something up, and it coincided with them doing well, doesn't mean what they were doing, was accurate, based on their formula. It doesn't mean that following it led them to their greatness, it also doesn't mean that following it took them to the peak that other moves couldn't of done.

It may give certain hints on what might be cost effective or not. But it doesn't give anyone any sort of concrete information that will make someone a champion. When you add in that many (if not all) organizations (at least in part) adopted some of this stuff, only makes this easier to understand. Not everyone can win. If everyone uses sabermetrics, still only one team wins.

I understand no one here believes in the sabermetric religion, but human beings, western civilization, colleges, businesses, gov't, etc.....ALL worship the sophistry of statistics. Which is basically the same thing. We base our lives off of guesses that everyone believes tells them something. When really, they tell you nothing. We all have to get away from trying to find something to fool us into believing something an incorrect process gives us just because it went through a process and everyone believes it is a real process.

We'd all be better off without these fake processes. We'd be even better off if we simply remember all this made up crap, is just that, made up crap, and stop believing in them. We've given far too much power to crap that doesn't deserve it. Statistics, the magic 8 ball for the masses.

But none of this, doesn't mean the movie isn't good. It just means what is in the movie isn't really believable. But movies don't have to be believable.

 

[Duckjake]

Statistics, the magic 8 ball for the masses.

I don't know. Tony LaRussa swears by them. He only won 6 pennants and 3 World Series in a sport where the 3rd most World Series titles by one team in the 100+ year history is 7. 16 teams have fewer WS titles than Tony L.

 

[Azlen]

People have to understand, soon, that statistics, formulas, models, are all guesses. There is no 'science' in them. They in fact don't even give an answer. Just a suggestion, that may or may not be right.
.
.
.
.
They either accurately describe everything perfect, or it is nothing more than coincidence. 0 or 1. There is no inbetween.

If you believe otherwise, you believe that a woman can be .95 pregnant.

You have taken how people have misapplied statistics and have gone to the extreme conclusion that they mean nothing. There is plenty of science in statistics and models.
While a woman can't be 95% pregnant, there are plenty of factors that can make a woman more or less likely to get pregnant under a certain set of circumstances.
To simplify things consideriably, after you've flipped a coin, it's either a head or a tail there is no in between, it can't be 95% chance of a head. But before you flip it, statistics tell us that there is a 50% chance of it being a head or a tail. If you roll a dice, statistics and math state that there will be a 16.7% chance of it being a 5.
People misuse statistics all the time, but when used properly they are a very tried and true principle of using past behavior to estimate future results.