Russell Wilson plays poorly in the First Quarter?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • • "Struggled in the first quarter (-9.1)."

    "Can you win in the first quarter? No." Concerning though. Would think that getting off to better starts has to be a goal for 2014.

    As pointed out by Stat Mode, it's definitely worth noting that Wilson did, however, have the second best grade (+14.7) in the second half of games, behind only Peyton Manning per that split; Wilson ranked 7th in the 3rd quarter (+7.7) and 6th in the 4th and overtime (+7.0).

    http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-anal ... ball-focus
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • He just likes to give the other team a sense of false hope
    EastCoastHawksFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 875
    Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 7:15 pm


  • Ya in 2013 his first quarter was not that great
    58/95 627yards 4TD/2INT 85.7rating rushing:82 yards

    He did however have a fantastic 2nd quarter rating. 11TD/0Int 125QB rating.

    2012 he was pretty damn good though:
    68/94 872yards 72.3% 5TD 0INT 118.8rating rushing: 109yards 2TD
    Image
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 833
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


  • The offense on the whole has been stronger in the second halves of games, it seems, throughout Carroll's tenure.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4608
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • You blame Wilson, he isn't calling the plays and they have not made adjustments yet, he is working off the script and the offense is testing and reading the defense's coverage and scheme to what we set up.

    So how many more knocks on Wilson are we going to have in the next week or so, seems that there are more people trying to spin every negative they can the last few weeks making it sickening to read some threads.

    For those that want to say then don't read them, Moderators job is to read them.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 10503
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Yet despite Russ's "poor" 1st quarter performances Seattle still outscored their opponents 69-22 in the 1st quarter and only trailed after the 1st quarter 3 times, vs. Tennessee 3-0, @ St. Louis 3-0, and @ San Francisco 6-0.
    Image
    You are absolutely entitled to state your opinion whenever you wish, and I am absolutely entitled to point out the stupidity of that opinion with the same frequency.
    User avatar
    SeatownJay
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 6101
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:38 pm
    Location: Hagerstown, MD


  • SeatownJay wrote:Yet despite Russ's "poor" 1st quarter performances Seattle still outscored their opponents 69-22 in the 1st quarter and only trailed after the 1st quarter 3 times, vs. Tennessee 3-0, @ St. Louis 3-0, and @ San Francisco 6-0.



    Our defense contributes to that stat
    EastCoastHawksFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 875
    Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 7:15 pm


  • chris98251 wrote:You blame Wilson, he isn't calling the plays and they have not made adjustments yet, he is working off the script and the offense is testing and reading the defense's coverage and scheme to what we set up.

    So how many more knocks on Wilson are we going to have in the next week or so, seems that there are more people trying to spin every negative they can the last few weeks making it sickening to read some threads.

    For those that want to say then don't read them, Moderators job is to read them.


    You have to take the good with the bad. Wilson was one of the best QBs in the league in the second half of games.

    I definitely don't think I am blaming or knocking Wilson; that seems uncalled for. It's an interesting statistic that has several implications, including play calling in the First Quarter, as you say.
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • Our playcalling has a definite feeling things out quality in the first quarter. I am sure that contributes.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10997
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Lynch and the running game has basically worn out the defense by the 2nd half, I believe that has a lot to do with it.

    Which is why I don't like the direction of more passing. we are so good at exhausting opposing defenses.
    User avatar
    Bobblehead
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 259
    Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am


  • How many negative threads of our Super Bowl winning, franchise greatest QB are enough?

    Off-season needs to end.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3726
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • Pete Carroll teams have always been known to start slow at times on the offensive end.

    It's Wilson's play in the second half of games that is so impressive.
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • Wilson has always been off at the start of games, often throwing high. Its not a new observation.

    Its not the playcalling or something that has to do with anything other than Wilson having early game jitters, but he gets over it quickly.

    Me and my dad were kind of laughing during the Super Bowl when Aikman mentioned Wilson's off throw to Miller as evidence that he was nervous and proof that it wasn't just any other game to Wilson as Wilson had said during interviews...because thats how Wilson is in just about every game.
    Meeker
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 342
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:33 pm


  • DavidSeven wrote:How many negative threads of our Super Bowl winning, franchise greatest QB are enough?

    Off-season needs to end.


    This was part of the Field Gulls report on the PFF scores. It was a good read, and we can use this to prognosticate areas of improvement in 2014.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15006
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • chris98251 wrote:You blame Wilson, he isn't calling the plays and they have not made adjustments yet, he is working off the script and the offense is testing and reading the defense's coverage and scheme to what we set up.

    So how many more knocks on Wilson are we going to have in the next week or so, seems that there are more people trying to spin every negative they can the last few weeks making it sickening to read some threads.

    For those that want to say then don't read them, Moderators job is to read them.



    I feel that was kind of aimed at my thread.

    In my defense, I didn't say one negative thing about Wilson unless you count that I don't think he has enough tenure to earn an elite grade and that he has a few defiencies in his game he could work on. I pretty much said he was elite in the sense that all he pretty much as to do is sustain his success... yet everyone kind of flew off the handle which more or less I half expected.

    On topic, I agree with you, the one thing that Bevell notoriously does is come up with mediorce play-calling to startout some games and then at times he'll selfishly stick to it when he needs to make adjustments.

    And I'll agree with others as well Carroll has built this to be the best 2nd Half team in the NFL. We finish hard and we finish strong.
    If I seem too passionate, it’s because I care. And if I come on too strong, it’s because I feel strongly. And if I push too hard, it’s because things aren’t moving fast enough. This is my home, you are my family, and I promise you, I’m not going anywhere.” - L.K.
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1891
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


  • There are a few contributing factors to note:

    1: Statistics based on small numbers are not very accurate. The difference between a poor 1st quarter grade and a fantastic 2nd quarter grade is just 2 INTs. That's statistically meaningless in a small sample size because they could simply be anomalies.

    2: There is greater urgency to score in the second half, and the 2-minute warning in particular. The rules that change at the 2-minute mark favor the passing game. The QB rating calculation heavily favors touchdowns.

    3: When they win the coin toss, the Seahawks almost always elect to defer, so their opponents usually have the ball first in the first quarter. Quite often this means Seattle has fewer first-quarter possessions than their opponents, meaning fewer opportunities to score in the first quarter, and the QB rating calculation quite heavily favors TDs. Conversely, we have more opportunities to score in the 2nd, which is borne out by the stats.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1269
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


  • I'm sure Peyton Maning is fantastic in 1st quarters, and in regular season games.
    hawk45
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4867
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


  • KiwiHawk wrote:There are a few contributing factors to note:

    1: Statistics based on small numbers are not very accurate. The difference between a poor 1st quarter grade and a fantastic 2nd quarter grade is just 2 INTs. That's statistically meaningless in a small sample size because they could simply be anomalies.

    This is the actually the only contributing factor.

    2: There is greater urgency to score in the second half, and the 2-minute warning in particular. The rules that change at the 2-minute mark favor the passing game. The QB rating calculation heavily favors touchdowns.

    That greater urgency leads to more interceptions as well. Last year QBs averaged a passer rating of 88.7 in the first quarter, 88.3 in the second quarter and 83.8 in the rest of the game. And even if it had been the case that QBs performed better in the second quarter, Wilson's PFF rating is relative to other QBs.

    3: When they win the coin toss, the Seahawks almost always elect to defer, so their opponents usually have the ball first in the first quarter. Quite often this means Seattle has fewer first-quarter possessions than their opponents, meaning fewer opportunities to score in the first quarter, and the QB rating calculation quite heavily favors TDs. Conversely, we have more opportunities to score in the 2nd, which is borne out by the stats.

    As WIlsonMVP pointed out, that wouldn't explain why it was the exact opposite last year, when Wilson was terrific in the first quarter.
    Perfundle
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 188
    Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:53 pm


  • of all my years watching football, I don't know if there is another qb I'd want with the game on the line in the 4th. Don't care what numbers say. He has won with legs and arm enough times in his first two years to warrant that confidence.

    edit: I thought in the OP it said 4th. doh
    Last edited by Smellyman on Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    Smellyman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 764
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
    Location: Taipei


  • When most games start, we tend to try to be pretty conventional in the passing game. We read the defenses, go through our checks, and try to make plays from the pocket. Let's be brutally honest. When we try to employ a conventional passing game, we can get pretty darn stagnant.

    Eventually, Russ figures out that he is going to have to make plays, and goes into his Fran Tarkenton routine, running all over the place and making big plays with his arm and feet.

    That is no way to live though. I like to see them stay with the conventional game as long as they can, and improve at it. Hopefully we can get to a level of a "dissecting" passing game at some point, where Russ can just shred and make it look effortless. I'm quite certain we'll get there.
    "So between my friends and I we have been at every home game to date this year, and we have all been plotting the offensive plays called. " ------Anthony!
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1404
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


  • EastCoastHawksFan wrote:He just likes to give the other team a sense of false hope


    Win.
    Image

    "The Seahawks showed today that they regarded me highly and I appreciate that, and I will continue to show how much I regard Paul Allen and the Seattle Seahawks with my play." - Richard Sherman
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 8051
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 6 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • Perfundle wrote:As WIlsonMVP pointed out, that wouldn't explain why it was the exact opposite last year, when Wilson was terrific in the first quarter.

    Actually it's a league-wide phenomenon that more points are scored in the 2nd quarter than in the first.

    Score By Quarter over the last 5,760 NFL games:
    Home / Visitor
    1st Quarter
    4.6 / 3.7
    2nd Quarter
    6.9 / 5.9
    3rd Quarter
    4.5 / 4.2
    4th Quarter
    6.1 / 5.6

    Overall that's a 60/40 split between first and 2nd quarter, so half again as many points are scored in the second as opposed to the first. It may have been the opposite last year for Wilson, but you're talking about one data point vs ten years of compiled data. Anomalies happen.

    There is a greater urgency to score in the 2nd half, the 2-minute rules are there to promote scoring at the end of the half, and because we defer the kickoff, we are likely to have fewer first-quarter possessions than our opponent.

    Combine those factors and Wilson's TD ratio between 1st and 2nd quarters is entirely consistent with the league norm.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1269
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


  • I think it is ok to evaluate a QB's play as fans no matter how great they are. You know damn well both Wilson and PC/staff are. That is how you identify flaws and improve.

    Personally, I would not say he played poorly....just not as great as later in the game. It is notable he normally takes a couple throws to get in the swing of things and that is fine. He seems to be getting better at getting that under control as we go. Also of note is, as the stats bare out, most teams "struggle" more in the 1st qtr as they feel each other out.

    Finally, if I am the coach it seems to me that we moved the ball down the field to the red zone pretty well even during this feeling out period but struggled to come away with TD's. I would make one of our goals to convert more TD's rather than FG's early in games. We do this and we become a scary force to be reckoned with. Talk about dominant games...wowch.
    Welcome to Mr. Wilson's Magic Show
    Strong safety Kam Chancellor, a 6-foot-3, 232-pound rhinoceros in cleats.....REED ALBERGOTTI
    Put them together, and this long-limbed, fleet-a-foot foursome forms a formidable force. ....Clare Farnsworth referencing the "Legion of Boom"
    oregonhawkfan
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 2043
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:08 pm


  • He wants to be the most clutch QB to ever play the game. It's all part of his plan.
    "Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force."

    - Barbie from Toy Story 3
    User avatar
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2211
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:47 pm


  • Yes RW does seem to have the jitters and too much adrenaline in the first series of the game. A great case in point is the over throw in the Super Bowl where he over threw Miller when he was wide open. But he has done that kind of thing since he's been here. But he quickly settles down and starts impacting the field. When it's said the RW isn't the best in the 1st quarter it's not like he is laying an egg the whole quarter. He just isn't up to where his standard is for the rest of the game. Again I submit it's not the entire quarter. It's not that he catches up with the game but rather the game catches up with him.

    Now I could be wrong, just ask the wife.
    " Living on Earth isn't cheap, but it does include a yearly free trip around the sun."
    User avatar
    v1rotv2
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 3385
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:32 am
    Location: The Open Road


  • We are a very heavy run orientated team. Establishing the run game early is our philosophy. It takes time to get the run game going so early on you may see more short gains on runs adding more pressure to early passes. This is not Wilson playing poorly, but a team philosophy on how they call plays. This philosophy has helped pave the way to back to back seasons with double digit wins and a Superbowl title.

    Sometimes I think the negativity towards Russell is due to the fact that he may not be an ideal fantasy football pick
    Last edited by warden on Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    warden
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1936
    Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:31 pm


  • warden wrote:We are a very heavy run orientated team. Establishing the run game early is our philosophy. It takes time to get the run game going so early on you may see more short gains on runs adding more pressure to early passes. This is not Wilson playing poorly, but a team philosophy on how they call plays. This philosophy has helped pave the way to back to back double digit wins and a Superbowl title.

    Sometimes I think the negativity towards Russell is due to the fact that he may not be an ideal fantasy football pick



    Exactly, that and the script all combines for slow starts. IN end who cares it is the end results that matters, and in that Rw is supreme.
    User avatar
    Anthony!
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 904
    Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:51 pm
    Location: Kent, wa


  • Except that it's not a slow start. It's consistent with the league average.

    This is an example of someone posting a stat out of context. It's looks significant that he only has 5 TD in the first vs 11 in the 2nd, but the statistical variance on that is going to be huge because of the small sample size, and if you look at the rest of the NFL, half-again as many points are scored in the second quarter as opposed to the first.

    So when you put it in context, Wilson's scoring is just like everyone else's, within statistical variance.

    Nothing to see here - it's all completely normal.

    It's just like if I said among typical office workers 40% of all sick days are taken on a Monday or Friday. People will immediately assume it's due to wanting a 3-day weekend, or Monday-itis, or some other reasoning, but considering the average office worker works Monday through Friday, an even distribution would mean 20% of sick days would fall on each day, so 40% on any two days is completely average.

    Statistics without context are meaningless. Always consider variation from the norm and statistical margin of error. In the NFL there are generally so few data points than margins for error are enormous.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1269
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


  • KiwiHawk wrote:Except that it's not a slow start. It's consistent with the league average.

    This is an example of someone posting a stat out of context.


    This would be a good explanation if it were true. Here is a list of PFF's grades for QBs in the First Quarter:

    https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... y-quarter/

    Image
    Image

    "Russell Wilson was by far at his worst in the first quarter (-9.1), as he graded among the top seven quarterbacks in all other quarters"

    Now these are only PFF grades (hardly definitive) but they do not show that Wilson's grade was consistent with the league average or that every QB had a negative grade in First Quarter.
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • KiwiHawk wrote:Actually it's a league-wide phenomenon that more points are scored in the 2nd quarter than in the first.

    That has nothing to do with Wilson's grade. Teams score more points in the second quarter but they also make more mistakes in the second quarter, WIlson's grade is not based on the fact that he scored more TDs in the second quarter; it's because he simply played poorer than the league average, whereas he played better than the league average in the second quarter.

    So when you put it in context, Wilson's scoring is just like everyone else's, within statistical variance.

    No, it's not. But I'm not sure why you can't accept that Wilson might have played worse in the first quarter when he played so much better in the second. It all balances out in the end.
    Perfundle
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 188
    Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:53 pm


  • Perfundle wrote:
    KiwiHawk wrote:Actually it's a league-wide phenomenon that more points are scored in the 2nd quarter than in the first.

    That has nothing to do with Wilson's grade. Teams score more points in the second quarter but they also make more mistakes in the second quarter, WIlson's grade is not based on the fact that he scored more TDs in the second quarter; it's because he simply played poorer than the league average, whereas he played better than the league average in the second quarter.

    So when you put it in context, Wilson's scoring is just like everyone else's, within statistical variance.

    No, it's not. But I'm not sure why you can't accept that Wilson might have played worse in the first quarter when he played so much better in the second. It all balances out in the end.



    again who cares it is the end results and in that RW has been amongst the best. What next Rw is the worst in the first 5 seconds of a game, really.
    User avatar
    Anthony!
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 904
    Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:51 pm
    Location: Kent, wa


  • Perfundle wrote:But I'm not sure why you can't accept that Wilson might have played worse in the first quarter when he played so much better in the second. It all balances out in the end.

    Because I understand statistical significance, and there is simply not a large enough sample size to support that his ranking is due to the quality of his play instead of statistical anomaly.

    For example, in the 2nd game of the season in the first quarter, Wilson goes long for Golden Tate, who falls down on the route, giving Eric Reed a free interception. This degrades Wilson's performance even though he has little to do with the interception unless somehow he's responsible for Tate's ability to remain upright.

    That's a statistical anomaly, and it tanks Wilson's 1st-quarter stats. If completed it goes for a 42-yard gain and changes the statistical analysis completely.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1269
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


  • Time Tebow sucked in the first half of games, too.

    ;)
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 10095
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • 1) Seahawks defer the ball to opposing team's offense and most other teams take the ball = RW has the ball less in 1st quarter

    2) first plays are usually scripted and run heavy. RW throws in third and long situations

    3) Seahawks is built around minimizing turnovers. I believe some high throws are result of being over cautious to start games. Ball goes out of bounds or gets caught. Live for the next series to avoid turnovers
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3317
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • mikeak wrote:1) Seahawks defer the ball to opposing team's offense and most other teams take the ball = RW has the ball less in 1st quarter

    2) first plays are usually scripted and run heavy. RW throws in third and long situations

    3) Seahawks is built around minimizing turnovers. I believe some high throws are result of being over cautious to start games. Ball goes out of bounds or gets caught. Live for the next series to avoid turnovers



    Excellent points and very true.
    User avatar
    Anthony!
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 904
    Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:51 pm
    Location: Kent, wa


  • Can you win the game in the first quarter?

    Pete Carroll
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2767
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Matt Flynn, Matt Cassell, and Chad Henne were really good 1st QTR QBs.

    Not worried.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10997
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • EastCoastHawksFan wrote:Our defense contributes to that stat


    Post of the year.
    Image

    "Everyone hath a plan... until they get punthed in the fathe." -- Mike Tython on the 2014 Theattle Theahawkth.
    User avatar
    LawlessHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1101
    Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Tonasket, WA to Temecula, CA


  • Scottemojo wrote:Matt Flynn, Matt Cassell, and Chad Henne were really good 1st QTR QBs.

    Not worried.


    I know what you're getting at, but all three had negative grades in the First Quarter, as well.
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • hawknation2014 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:Matt Flynn, Matt Cassell, and Chad Henne were really good 1st QTR QBs.

    Not worried.


    I know what you're getting at, but all three had negative grades in the First Quarter, as well.


    I think your misusing the presentation.
    User avatar
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3440
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


  • I didn't read all of the above posts, so forgive me if someone mentioned this before:

    The seahawks offense is predicated on tiring out the defense so of course offensive numbers should be better later in the game. Russell's numbers are a product of the offense. If he played for a pass-first team, his numbers would be more even throughout games.
    Image
    User avatar
    oasis
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 448
    Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:01 am


  • Jville wrote:
    hawknation2014 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:Matt Flynn, Matt Cassell, and Chad Henne were really good 1st QTR QBs.

    Not worried.


    I know what you're getting at, but all three had negative grades in the First Quarter, as well.


    I think your misusing the presentation.


    How so? :2:
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • hawknation2014 wrote:
    Jville wrote:
    hawknation2014 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:Matt Flynn, Matt Cassell, and Chad Henne were really good 1st QTR QBs.

    Not worried.


    I know what you're getting at, but all three had negative grades in the First Quarter, as well.


    I think your misusing the presentation.


    How so? :2:


    I haven't been able to explain it to you. I tried a couple of months ago with no success. I also pointed to the prerequisite knowledge required to discuss it.

    There are posts within this thread that address misuse as well. Those posts have also had little success. With all due respect, I can only assume that the required prerequisite knowledge is missing. Please believe that there are many in the same boat .... it's not an insult.

    In some ways the nature of statistics is like the nature of Xs & Os. One doesn't necessarily need prerequisite knowledge to enjoy the spectacle. But without it, one can arrive at rather erroneous perspectives and conclusions. It feeds all the inconclusive discourse of these threads. LOL

    I do read personal messages ... so feel free to us the PM button.
    User avatar
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3440
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


  • Jville wrote:
    hawknation2014 wrote:
    Jville wrote:
    I think your misusing the presentation.


    How so? :2:


    I haven't been able to explain it to you. I tried a couple of months ago with no success. I also pointed to the prerequisite knowledge required to discuss it.

    There are posts within this thread that address misuse as well. Those posts have also had little success. With all due respect, I can only assume that the required prerequisite knowledge is missing. Please believe that there are many in the same boat .... it's not an insult.

    In some ways the nature of statistics is like the nature of Xs & Os. One doesn't necessarily need prerequisite knowledge to enjoy the spectacle. But without it, one can arrive at rather erroneous perspectives and conclusions. It feeds all the inconclusive discourse of these threads. LOL

    I do read personal messages ... so feel free to us the PM button.


    FYI, I have no idea what you are talking about. We have never discussed this topic before, and your only previous attempt to discuss the topic in this thread was with the opaque statement, "I think your misusing the presentation," without any further elaboration.

    That's a particularly strange statement because I have not drawn any of my own conclusions from PFF's data. Instead, I have presented the data for the purposes of discussion (notice the question mark in the title?). You have chosen not to participate in this discussion, and that's perfectly fine.

    What PFF is using is a stratified sample based on "QB dropbacks" in each quarter. I have studied statistics in both college and grad school (B.A., MBA, and J.D.) A sample size of 111 dropbacks is certainly large enough. The issue is the method by which PFF individually grades each dropback; this is a mostly subjective grade that can be disputed one way or the other. It's great for the purposes of discussion (which is what this thread was supposed to be!) but hardly a definitive account of an objective reality.
    User avatar
    hawknation2014
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1631
    Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:59 am


  • hawknation2014 wrote:What PFF is using is a stratified sample based on "QB dropbacks" in each quarter. I have studied statistics in both college and grad school (B.A., MBA, and J.D.) A sample size of 111 dropbacks is certainly large enough. The issue is the method by which PFF individually grades each dropback; this is a mostly subjective grade that can be disputed one way or the other. It's great for the purposes of discussion (which is what this thread was supposed to be!) but hardly a definitive account of an objective reality.

    It's not entirely true that the sample size is sufficient if there is weighting involved. Different outcomes have different weight with regard to scoring the QBs. An interception doesn't count for one bad grade over 111 dropbacks. It can negate the benefit of 10 or more completions, in which case the interception would account for 10% of the sample with regard to impact size. If you have one event that can make that great an impact, then you have to expand your margin of error to account for it, in which case the statistical variance between Wilson and the NFL norm is within the margin of error, and the result cannot be considered statistically meaningful.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1269
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand




It is currently Tue Sep 16, 2014 5:46 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information