PFF ranking Mitch

[remydat]

What is "Expected Points Added"?

Expected Points (EP) – The value of the current down, distance, and field position situation in terms of future expected net point advantage. In other words, it is the net point value a team can expect given a particular combination of down, distance, and field position. First and goal at the one represents an EP near 6, while 3rd and 20 at a team’s own one yard line represents an EP of about -2. EP differs from Win Probability (WP) in that it does not take into account the game score and time remaining.

Expected Points Added (EPA) – The difference between the Expected Points (EP) at the start of a play and the EP at the end of they play. EPA is the measure of a play’s impact on the score of the game. An individual player’s EPA is the sum of the EPA of the plays in which that player was directly involved. Being directly involved is defined as an offensive player who ran, threw, or kicked the ball, was targeted by a pass, or flagged for a penalty.

 

[remydat]

There are two things going on:
1) They are pretty aggressively going after Trubisky in their narratives.
2) Their data collection/analysis makes Trubisky look bad.

So which one drives the other?

First, let's remember that they had Trubisky as the best rookie QB last year, so it would be odd to start being angry about a narrative NOW and not last year, when most thought it was ridiculous that Watson was graded behind Trubisky.

So it's probably the data collection/analysis.

PFF Eric (Vikings fan FWIW) posts a chart most weeks about how their grading compares to expected points added. This one is a couple of weeks old, but you can see my point.

He posts this to show who is being helped by scheme and support players (possible indication of long term regression), but it may also be a great chart to indicate gaps in their data. They would never tell you that side of it though.

Their grading differs from the results on Mitch more than any other player.

Why?

Well, IMO it likely has to do with the offense. Who is #2 on the list of largest discrepancy? Pat Mahommes. There are some other similar offenses that mean this isn't a slam dunk take, but most things in data aren't. When #1 and #2 are in similar offenses though, I tend to think there is an issue grading that offense.

So that's my thought.

But why the strong narratives then?
1) It drives traffic
2) Chicago is their largest market base
3) Bears fans keep attacking them and the back and forth fuels itself and irritates them, causing them to go harder.

Well he graded out higher last year because his supporting cast was shit and so he had to make a lot of tight throws. By contrast, his supporting cast is better and guys are schemed open more so he is making easier throws. Same thing with Mahommes who if I recall has the most passes to wide open WRs as anyone in the NFL.

So they both are essentially victims of the talent around them and the scheme they are in as PFF is of the view that they are making passes that other QBs should be able to make given the talent around them and how wide open their WRs are.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. As long as they keep hitting the passes they should then so be it.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Expected Points (EP) – The value of the current down, distance, and field position situation in terms of future expected net point advantage. In other words, it is the net point value a team can expect given a particular combination of down, distance, and field position. First and goal at the one represents an EP near 6, while 3rd and 20 at a team’s own one yard line represents an EP of about -2. EP differs from Win Probability (WP) in that it does not take into account the game score and time remaining.

Expected Points Added (EPA) – The difference between the Expected Points (EP) at the start of a play and the EP at the end of they play. EPA is the measure of a play’s impact on the score of the game. An individual player’s EPA is the sum of the EPA of the plays in which that player was directly involved. Being directly involved is defined as an offensive player who ran, threw, or kicked the ball, was targeted by a pass, or flagged for a penalty.

LOL at "field position" being an individual metric. Its not that hard to figure out. The QBs who play on teams that score a lot of points aren't accurately represented by PFF's grading...ok.

 

[modo]

PFF cites luck as one of the factors why Trubisky is outperforming their rating......how the fuck do you measure luck?

I guess when a player outperforms what the expected PFF score they just chalk it up to luck......because their system can't possibly be imperfect and subject to mistakes.

 

[remydat]

LOL at "field position" being an individual metric. Its not that hard to figure out. The QBs who play on teams that score a lot of points aren't accurately represented by PFF's grading...ok.

Don't think that is what it is saying. It takes historical data of down, distance, and FP and determines the points one can expect to score based on that down, distance, and FP based on those historical results. So if teams score a TD 85% of the time from the 1, a FG 10% of the time, and zero points 5% of the time, the expected points would be 5.4.

Once you know that, you can then compare that 5.4 to the the actual points a player gets on a give play. So if Trubs scores the TD then he added 0.6 points (6-5.4). If they had to settle for a FG then he added -2.4 (3-5.4). The EPA overall would then be the sum total of all the EPA from all the plays a player was involved in.

 

[xer0h0ur]

Not sure why you would need PFF for "stone cold factual stats"...its not like that information is held under lock and key. PFF's "advanced stats" include a great deal of subjectivity, so I'm not sure how someone could have reservations about PFF's grading and at the same time be fine with referencing their "advanced stats". Its the same wonky system spitting out numbers in a slightly different format.

Nope, there are plenty of what they call advanced stats that aren't subjective. Its simply statistics that aren't commonly charted over time that they do chart or being able to look at snap breakdowns of any given player for instance. It is what it is. I like some of their stuff and other things I don't. Doubt you're going to list off any source of information that is flawless when it comes to football.

I just don't like how expensive PFF is compared to what you get which as we can see is quite flawed.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Don't think that is what it is saying. It takes historical data of down, distance, and FP and determines the points one can expect to score based on that down, distance, and FP based on those historical results. So if teams score a TD 85% of the time from the 1, a FG 10% of the time, and zero points 5% of the time, the expected points would be 5.4.

Once you know that, you can then compare that 5.4 to the the actual points a player gets on a give play. So if Trubs scores the TD then he added 0.6 points (6-5.4). If they had to settle for a FG then he added -2.4 (3-5.4). The EPA overall would then be the sum total of all the EPA from all the plays a player was involved in.

That makes absolutely no sense. Teams rarely are on the 1. The vast majority of the time they are 20-99 yards away from the endzone. Teams aren't scoring points on every play. The vast majority of the plays in the NFL do not result in a score.

Not even counting the 400 rushing attempts in which, based on the above scoring system, Trubisky would not be "involved", Trubisky had 434 pass attempts, 68 rushing attempts, and 24 times sacked for a total of 526 plays in which he was "involved". Of those 526 plays, Trubisky contributed points on 27 of those plays (24 passing TDs + 3 rushing TDs). So, in essence, EPA is judging Trubisky on 5% of his plays and ignoring the other 95%.

Great system.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Nope, there are plenty of what they call advanced stats that aren't subjective.

Plenty, yet you cite none. Good job.

 

[remydat]

That makes absolutely no sense. Teams rarely are on the 1. The vast majority of the time they are 20-99 yards away from the endzone. Teams aren't scoring points on every play. The vast majority of the plays in the NFL do not result in a score.

Not even counting the 400 rushing attempts in which, based on the above scoring system, Trubisky would not be "involved", Trubisky had 434 pass attempts, 68 rushing attempts, and 24 times sacked for a total of 526 plays in which he was "involved". Of those 526 plays, Trubisky contributed points on 27 of those plays (24 passing TDs + 3 rushing TDs). So, in essence, EPA is judging Trubisky on 5% of his plays and ignoring the other 95%.

Great system.

You are confused. If it is first and 10 at the 50 yard line, there is still historical data on the expected points teams for teams based on that down, distance and FG. If historically they ended up scoring a TD 20% of the time, a FG 30% of the time or nothing 50% of the time, the EP would be 2.1.

If a QB then throws a 20 yard pass and it is now 1st and 10 at the 30, you can then calculate the expected points for a team historically at the 30 yard line and then the difference between the EP at the 50 and the EP at the 30 would be how many expected points the QB added. So for every down, distance and FP, you calculate the EPA by a given player based on the new EP of the new down, distance, FP that a give play yielded.

Also, PFF doesn't use this. Separate system. I think what Glider was saying is that PFF was claiming their grading was consistent with this EPA model not that they use this model. In any event, you asked what EP was and I have now explained it to you.

 

[xer0h0ur]

We should probably revisit this, because playoff performmance can really elevate and drop a QB's stock imo. The better QBs play well in the postseason. Is Trubisky a Russell Wilson, or an Andy Dalton?

Okay, so then how much exactly am I discounting Peyton Manning's career since he was the definition of a playoff scrub despite being a regular season god?

 

[Milton Waddams]

I think Mitch suffers a bit for the trade-up with SF. Some BEARS fans and non-BEARS fans alike are still cunting about "You could've stayed put at 3 and drafted him. You got fleeced." It's stupid. The 2 other teams who took QB's after Mitch also traded up, you never hear a thing about that. Pace got some of the draft capital back. He used that capital, traded around and managed to pick up Jackson & Cohen in the 4th (if he'd only taken Juju, Kamara, Kupp, Hunt, Griffin, Golladay, Conner, or Kittle in the 2nd instead of Shaheen...). Who knows if CLE was trying to trade up to 2 to take Mitch. Pace ID'd his guy and wasn't going to let him get scooped up after missing out on Wentz & Mariota (vs whom, right now, Mitch isn't looking so bad).

The biggest factor is he's not Mahomes. He's always going to suffer for not being Mahomes, given that Mahomes was on the board when we picked Mitch. It sucks to miss out on a Rodgers (if Mahomes continues to do what he's done). But I look at Mitch like a Roethlisberger (without the rapey, big-headed fat assedness). Roethlisberger got drafted by a good team and came in and won with them. He didn't put up big #'s until his 4th year. He's not Rodgers or Brady or Brees. He's not the best of the best. He's just really good. Anyway, here are Roethlisberger's #'s early on:

Rookie - 295 attempts -- 66.4 completion % -- 2,621 yards -- 8.89 avg -- 17 TD -- 11 INT
2nd year - 268 attempts -- 62.7 completion % -- 2,385 yards -- 8.90 avg -- 17 TD -- 9 INT
3rd year - 469 attempts -- 59.7 completion % -- 3,513 yards -- 7.49 avg -- 18 TD -- 23 INT
4th year -- 404 attempts -- 65.4 completion % -- 3,154 yards -- 7.81 avg -- 32 TD -- 11 INT

Mitch:

Rookie - 330 attempts -- 59.4 completion % -- 2,193 yards -- 6.65 avg -- 7 TD -- 7 INT
2nd year - 434 attempts -- 66.6 completion % -- 3,223 yards -- 7.43 avg -- 24 TD -- 12 INT*

*Mitch didn't get to play against 2 crappy teams, one of which (DET) he torched the first time he played them. He probably would've put up 28 TD's this year if not for the shoulder.

Roethlisberger has now played 15 seasons. He's thrown for 56,194 yards -- 363 TD -- 190 INT. If Mitch plays 15 or so seasons, has those #'s, wins 2 Super Bowls (as Roethlisberger has), I'll be ecstatic as AF. I'm sure we all will be. He's not Rodgers (or probably Mahomes). But if he ends up being one of the upper-echelon QB's in the league, plays for a bunch of years, and helps our team win...I'm good.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

You are confused. If it is first and 10 at the 50 yard line, there is still historical data on the expected points teams for teams based on that down, distance and FG. If historically they ended up scoring a TD 20% of the time, a FG 30% of the time or nothing 50% of the time, the EP would be 2.1.

If a QB then throws a 20 yard pass and it is now 1st and 10 at the 30, you can then calculate the expected points for a team historically at the 30 yard line and then the difference between the EP at the 50 and the EP at the 30 would be how many expected points the QB added. So for every down, distance and FP, you calculate the EPA by a given player based on the new EP of the new down, distance, FP that a give play yielded.

Also, PFF doesn't use this. Separate system. I think what Glider was saying is that PFF was claiming their grading was consistent with this EPA model not that they use this model. In any event, you asked what EP was and I have now explained it to you.

Not confused. Expected Points still uses points as the measurement, and the vast majority of NFL plays, even successful ones, don't result in points. Its an all or nothing criteria, which is even more ridiculous when you consider its being used for an INDIVIDUAL metric. You have no idea what you are talking about, which isn't a surprise since we've delved into statistics.

Your repeated example of teams scoring 50% of the time from a certain down and distance is ridiculous. Please tell me what down-and-distance would actually have a team scoring a TD 20% of the time, a FG 30% of the time, and nothing 50% of the time. Is Marc Trestman sending his FG team out on 2nd down again?

Not sure what "historical data" you keep referring to, but I assure you that the EPA is statistically insignificant. You have explained nothing.

 

[xer0h0ur]

Oh hey look. Rory still being braneded. Didn't see that coming.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Oh hey look. Rory still being braneded. Didn't see that coming.

Sorry, but when remydat takes your side in a CCS 'argument', you probably aren't correct.

All I am asking for is an explanation for what Expected Points is...remy's repeated example is the most Special person thing I've heard all year (72 hours). Again, please tell me what down-and-distance would actually have a team scoring a TD 20% of the time, a FG 30% of the time, and nothing 50% of the time. If you can't answer my question, then quit chirping and just admit you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[xer0h0ur]

No. You're literally a moron of the highest order. You asked what something was. He answered. You then went on some autistic tirade as if he had developed EP. Then you further went down with the sinking ship as if EP was PFF's baby. Its a fucking stat that was born in the 80's and brought back to life by Brian Burke at AdvancedNFLStats.com. I mean holy shit. Get a fucking grip ya god damned baby.

 

[SugarWalls]

Why is trubisky’s expected points so fucking high on this chart? Is it because of scheme? Is it because of supporting cast? If so, then why is chase Daniel on the complete opposite fucking side of the chart with the same supporting cast, and the same scheme?

Also, these statistics say chase Daniel is a better quarterback than trubisky. I’m sorry but we all watched the games and it’s obviously not that way.

I’m sorry but it’s hard for me to take this metric seriously.

 

[xer0h0ur]

No one is telling anyone to like any stat. In fact the only entertainment I get out of something like EPA is that it makes you try to think analytically about those outliers like Mahomes or Trubisky.

 

[SugarWalls]

Sorry, but when remydat takes your side in a CCS 'argument', you probably aren't correct.

Lmao can this be pasted somewhere under forum description or rules.

 

[modo]

Why is trubisky’s expected points so fucking high on this chart? Is it because of scheme? Is it because of supporting cast? If so, then why is chase Daniel on the complete opposite fucking side of the chart with the same supporting cast, and the same scheme?

Also, these statistics say chase Daniel is a better quarterback than trubisky mainly because of luck, and in the Twitter the guy defines luck as ‘passes that should’ve been intercepted but weren’t.’

I’m sorry but it’s hard for me to take this metric seriously.

Almost INTs are the magic stat.....it explains everything that traditional stats can't account for.....plus luck. If reality doesn't jibe with what PFF is dishing out you just say "because luck" and all is explained......PFF is never wrong.

Next time my boss asks why are sales metrics don't reflect reality I'll just say luck.....that should go over well.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

No. You're literally a moron of the highest order. You asked what something was. He answered. You then went on some autistic tirade as if he had developed EP. Then you further went down with the sinking ship as if EP was PFF's baby. Its a fucking stat that was born in the 80's and brought back to life by Brian Burke at AdvancedNFLStats.com. I mean holy shit. Get a fucking grip ya god damned baby.

Yeah, remydat answered "ostensibly", but it made no sense. I guess I wasn't clear...I am seeking an answer that actually makes sense. Since you are so intelligent, I am sure you will be happy to provide an explanation. For the fourth time, please tell me what down-and-distance would actually have a team scoring a TD 20% of the time, a FG 30% of the time, and nothing 50% of the time.

I admit I've never heard of "EP" before, yet you criticize me for not knowing who Brian Burke is and that the stat was born in the 80's. Makes sense.

So, in sum, my understanding is that you posted some chart that compares one make believe "stat" (PFF grading) to another make believe "stat" (Doris Burke's EP), and then you are surprised that there isn't a 1:1 relationship between the "stats". Wow!