jrb12711 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 What's funny is your defending analytics until it goes against something you believe to be common sense. So analytics is good as long as it supports your view. For the record I think it's crazy to never punt as well. The whole point was show analytics is only a tool to help make decisions not the sole reference in making them. I'm fine with hiring analytics people I just don't want to build a team using it as my main decision maker "like Haslam might". I fear that he's trying again to prove he's smarter than everyone in the league. Which can only end badly. What? I really don't understand what you're saying. Look, I don't look at the models these guys do. but for example I'm quite certain if the game is tied 0-0 in the first quarter and your team is facing a 4th and 20 from your own 5, the model would spit out a 99.9999% opinion to punt the ball. That would qualify in stats as "common sense" I work with stats every day albeit in a way, way different field. I am biased which I admit, but I see where stats can heavily inform opinions in a positive manner all the time. It's crazy and doesn't make sense even to me sometimes, but we admit students that on paper shouldn't be in the program but excel. Who knows what Haslam is really thinking hiring these guys but you should resign yourself to the idea that stats and analysis will play heavily into decisions. Of course stats can be wrong, but the Browns certainly haven't gotten much right up until today right? Of course this stuff can't be the only way to make decisions, but it can really inform decisions. It'll be very, very interesting to see how it plays out because if the Brownies finally get a break it could be the start of a new wave of thinking in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcam222 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I think use of analytic's as a tool for talent evaluation is valuable in many businesses including obviously baseball and football. I think it has to be tempered and "massaged" if you will by common sense and experience. In our business of late we have used analytic's heavily in assessing new commercial hires. Unfortunately we use it somewhat in a vacuum with the final checks and balances (interviews) done by inexperienced folks. The results so far have been less than stellar. I am hoping we soon add some very experienced strong football guys into the mix. It is going to be essential. I think if we do this may be a very exciting chapter in Browns history and maybe even finally an arrow up in our abysmal drafting history. I do however have concerns with the whole reporting structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I like the idea in theory. I'll reserve the right to shit on it if it fails in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 What? I really don't understand what you're saying. Look, I don't look at the models these guys do. but for example I'm quite certain if the game is tied 0-0 in the first quarter and your team is facing a 4th and 20 from your own 5, the model would spit out a 99.9999% opinion to punt the ball. That would qualify in stats as "common sense" I work with stats every day albeit in a way, way different field. I am biased which I admit, but I see where stats can heavily inform opinions in a positive manner all the time. It's crazy and doesn't make sense even to me sometimes, but we admit students that on paper shouldn't be in the program but excel. Who knows what Haslam is really thinking hiring these guys but you should resign yourself to the idea that stats and analysis will play heavily into decisions. Of course stats can be wrong, but the Browns certainly haven't gotten much right up until today right? Of course this stuff can't be the only way to make decisions, but it can really inform decisions. It'll be very, very interesting to see how it plays out because if the Brownies finally get a break it could be the start of a new wave of thinking in the game. I agree with you in that common sense would say to punt, but that's not really the way it's figured in this point of view. It's more of an expected points situation. And that's where things get wacky, but yet also sort of... make sense? In the most basic of rationality, the further in your own territory you are, the higher chance the other team has to score off of your punt. For instance, punting from your own 5 would give the opposing team better field position than, say, punting from your own 35. Better field position then leads to a higher expected point value for the other team. Add in the fact that punting yields an expected return of 0 points for you, where going for it yields an expected return of > 0 points, and you can see why the case can be made to never punt...and why it would actually make less sense to punt the further in your territory you get backed up. This is just one situation of how analytics can be completely skewed. Of course, common sense would dictate that you punt in that situation. But looking at the expected point values, it would actually make more sense to go for it. That's because most of these models (at least the ones that I've read so far) don't account for turnovers as negative points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Oakland A's haven't won squat under Billy Bean. Unless you count division pennants... OK, so, tell us why. Not a name I know. Price is the Mets' prized 3rd baseman. Jimmy is about as corporate as it gets......and Id say he's trying to build what most would call a consensus decision making team... Ill add that if Jimmy is in any way a part of the group...being owner and the boss.... he will pollute the integrity of the system and prevent true consensus from occurring.....(can he let them do their thing....alone????) So.....lots of words here....sorry bout that....but I think by hearing Jimmys words....a consensus is what he prefers and he's REALLY trying to pick people who have the lack of ego, along with the intellect and patience and maturity to operate this kind of system..... Really good summaries... I'll take a stab at pulling them together. The trick is to drive consensus without tipping the scale one way or another. But there are two roles that are incapable of doing this: the boss (Haslam) and a key stakeholder (Sashi)... and I don't give a shit what the latter's ego level is. Only a skilled mediator/facilitator with no skin in the game can drive consensus. Who is this guy in this org? It could have, maybe should have, been Sashi, but he was given a direct report who is a key player, The Scoutmaster. And Haslam just made it worse IMO... Yesterday he set up Sashi to be his "strategic guy"... praised him for his strategic approach, ability to develop strategy, etc., etc. Sashi and strategy were mentioned together at least three times in Jimmah's presser. Today? Haslam names Podesta to be Chief Strategy Officer... and makes him direct report #4 to boot. Odd title for "the metrics guy"... and an even stranger Org Chart addition for an Owner/President who seemed unwilling to intervene between 2 of his 3 direct reports in the prior org. How does he not pollute the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Fingers Farmer Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I'm hopeful this works but the analytics say we'll be here again in two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Of course, common sense would dictate that you punt in that situation. But looking at the expected point values, it would actually make more sense to go for it. That's because most of these models (at least the ones that I've read so far) don't account for turnovers as negative points. Interesting, that would be really odd to me that turnovers wouldn't factor in a negative expected points value. I really don't know anything about the models they use though-I get that at a base level but it seems the model could account for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Muni Lot Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Here's the (abbreviated) way I look at it: we've sucked forever with conventional thinking, and clearly are among the worst in the NFL when going down that road. If we are going to continue to suck, at least it'll be after trying something different and bold. What the fuck do we have to lose? Let's roll the dice. As a wise bartender once said: 'Anything else is always something better.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bone Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I still say they should all report to Watson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runyon27 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Price is the Mets' prized 3rd baseman. David Wright is the Mets 3rd baseman, Price is a pitcher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runyon27 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I agree with you in that common sense would say to punt, but that's not really the way it's figured in this point of view. It's more of an expected points situation. And that's where things get wacky, but yet also sort of... make sense? In the most basic of rationality, the further in your own territory you are, the higher chance the other team has to score off of your punt. For instance, punting from your own 5 would give the opposing team better field position than, say, punting from your own 35. Better field position then leads to a higher expected point value for the other team. Add in the fact that punting yields an expected return of 0 points for you, where going for it yields an expected return of > 0 points, and you can see why the case can be made to never punt...and why it would actually make less sense to punt the further in your territory you get backed up. This is just one situation of how analytics can be completely skewed. Of course, common sense would dictate that you punt in that situation. But looking at the expected point values, it would actually make more sense to go for it. That's because most of these models (at least the ones that I've read so far) don't account for turnovers as negative points. Isnt the analytics going to be used in player acquisition. The coach will coach the players and make game decisions. How analytics will translate into player acquisition I have no idea, I would have to see what metrics they would be using to help them make decisions. Baseball is a stat sport even before sabre metrics came out so it makes a lot of since there. I think its much more difficult for football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby73 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Depodesta- it's like hitting a HR & rounding 2nd Crow de cleats himself & falls at midfield. Get to the real Football People Please.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 David Wright is the Mets 3rd baseman, Price is a pitcher. They swapped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Bone Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Hopefully the analytics will simply look at what the Cleveland Browns would normally do, who they would sign and who they would draft............ and completely do the opposite. Hey, it worked pretty well for George Costanza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted January 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Hopefully the analytics will simply look at what the Cleveland Browns would normally do, who they would sign and who they would draft............ and completely do the opposite. Hey, it worked for pretty well for George Costanza. We should have kept Farmer and Pettine on board - especially since we're still paying them. Just let them finish their big board and work away from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby73 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 This locker room could not take another year of Farmer nor Pet with this personnel . Jimmy blamed himself & he's damn right for blaming himself. Damn shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Interesting, that would be really odd to me that turnovers wouldn't factor in a negative expected points value. I really don't know anything about the models they use though-I get that at a base level but it seems the model could account for that. In the couple studies I've found thus far, the running theme is either "you score or you don't score", where each individual possession is looked at in a bubble, rather than in a linear model. In that line of thought, turning the ball over is, in effect, the same as punting...in that you didn't score. You're just giving the opposition the ball in a much better position for them to score. So a 3-yard run on 4th and 10 is no different than a 3 yard punt, basically. It's wacky. Like I said, it kind of makes sense...but it's also just wrong because football is a causal sport. Every single thing that happens in a football game until the first score is based off of what happens on the opening kick. Then everything until the next score is based off of the next kick. It's not like baseball, where you get a completely clean slate the next inning (if nobody scores). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Banner did give a good example of analytics potential conflict with traditional coaching philosophy: passing early vs. establishing the run. Analytics say the team leading at the half has the greater chance to win the game and passing leads to more scoring therefore you pass early. Traditionally HCs, and Defensive minded HCs in particular, would resist passing in favor of ball control early setting up the pass game late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Hopefully the analytics will simply look at what the Cleveland Browns would normally do, who they would sign and who they would draft............ and completely do the opposite. Hey, it worked pretty well for George Costanza. Which is exactly why I said fuck the QB chase and draft Bosa. Every year the Browns chase QB's with exactly the same results. And right on this board I'm watching Browns fall in love with this or that QB. Last week it was Lynch (until he got his clock cleaned). This week it's Goff. Fuck that shit. Pick the best fucking player available, not the fucking position. It's never worked here. Hell we just watched a dominant defensive player pull a former Browns QB right into the playoffs. Ring any bells? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Which is exactly why I said fuck the QB chase and draft Bosa. Every year the Browns chase QB's with exactly the same results. And right on this board I'm watching Browns fall in love with this or that QB. Last week it was Lynch (until he got his clock cleaned). This week it's Goff. Fuck that shit. Pick the best fucking player available, not the fucking position. It's never worked here. Hell we just watched a dominant defensive player pull a former Browns QB right into the playoffs. Ring any bells? We have drafted the consensus #1 QB exactly once in the history of the new Browns. Maybe once in the entire history of the Browns? I don't disagree with you, but this situation isn't necessarily the same. Goff + whoever or Bosa + Wentz are the only two options I'd like to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 . Hell we just watched a dominant defensive player pull a former Browns QB right into the playoffs. Ring any bells? Two former Browns QB's if we're being honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted January 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Two former Browns QB's if we're being honest. Playoff appearance has little to do with the QBs on that team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Playoff appearance has little to do with the QBs on that team Without question... It's all about the defense. Less than 10 points a game for the last like 6 games or more. Even our drunk midget fucktard QB could win a few games with a defense giving up 10 or less per game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Wondering how Lou Groza would have fit into this analytics thing.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Wondering how Lou Groza would have fit into this analytics thing.. Who knows. The invention of the forward pass also throws a wrench in it, since we're mentioning things that happened 600 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReginaBrownsFan Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I love it. To be honest it seems like we are doomed to loose no mater what we do. I would love to see us change the game and get ahead of the curve. I just hope that we can get the football people we need at coach and "GM" to buy into it and actually make it work. Our situation is such a mess that we need a major shake up to turn this thing around. I'm willing to give this a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggins7919 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I'm pretty stoked about this, and I think this is a ballsy move by a team that is already under tremendous scrutiny. This is not playing it safe, this is not doing what people expect, and this MIGHT be just what we need. We aren't trying to catch up to other teams, we're trying to forge our own path. I think that's pretty cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 In the couple studies I've found thus far, the running theme is either "you score or you don't score", where each individual possession is looked at in a bubble, rather than in a linear model. In that line of thought, turning the ball over is, in effect, the same as punting...in that you didn't score. You're just giving the opposition the ball in a much better position for them to score. So a 3-yard run on 4th and 10 is no different than a 3 yard punt, basically. It's wacky. Like I said, it kind of makes sense...but it's also just wrong because football is a causal sport. Every single thing that happens in a football game until the first score is based off of what happens on the opening kick. Then everything until the next score is based off of the next kick. It's not like baseball, where you get a completely clean slate the next inning (if nobody scores). Yeah, I mean that all makes sense at a base level but I'd be surprised if they couldn't create a model to counteract that for football. Of course, modeling software that does that literally costs $500,000 sometimes, but Haslam can sneeze that much towards the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 We have drafted the consensus #1 QB exactly once in the history of the new Browns. Maybe once in the entire history of the Browns? I don't disagree with you, but this situation isn't necessarily the same. Goff + whoever or Bosa + Wentz are the only two options I'd like to see. I find myself strangely agreeing. Not so sure on Wentz, but I'm hoping for Bosa and a developmental guy (with McCown being able to start for a year or two) or Goff and then who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Well if we want to put a positive spin on things, we could say that the Browns are following Paul Brown's tradition of innovation with this hire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.