Front Office Football Central  

Go Back   Front Office Football Central > Main Forums > Off Topic
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Statistics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-12-2021, 06:28 PM   #1
QuikSand
lolzcat
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
FOF: field goal data-mining and value-generation

So, I have an idea. I'm kinda sick of looking at kickers who hit on 26 out of 31 attempts for a given season, and not really knowing what to do with that.

The idea would require some data collection, and then some implementation. I'm hoping that by laying out the idea here, we can refine it, and then maybe someone(s) with the requisite access/skills can help advance the ball from here.

-Core idea: develop a "net points from kick attempts" number, generated from any given kicker's various attempt distances

-Implementation: Well, we'd need a baseline to start from, presumably drawn from some data set of fairly recent FOF outcomes. But if we knew that a kicker taking a 42 yard attempt has, on balance, a 71% chance of making that kick... then the expected outcome from the play is 0.71 x 3 = 2.13 points. So, if he actually makes the kick, he netted his team +0.87 points over that baseline, and if he misses, he cost them -2.13 points. Extend that logic to all the attempts for FGs and PATs over a season/career, and we could have a reasonable metric for that guy's value, from kick attempts, over that stretch of time - the sum of those net outcomes.

-What we'd need to start with: A FOF data set we'd consider reliable, to establish those base expectation values. And then, eventually, a way to get this into add-on tools, or a web applet, or whatever you nifty coding types might come up with, to have this evaluation tool handy.



Poke holes in this, by all means.

QuikSand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2021, 06:37 PM   #2
JonInMiddleGA
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
My first thought on first reading was that sample sizes might be misleading.

The output wouldn't be "wrong" - cause they did whatever they did - but I'm not sure it'd be indicative of anything more than a guy getting a few extra kisses from the RNG.

Phrased another way (since I ain't sure how clearly I said what I was thinking): we'd know what his WAR value was, I'm not sure we'd come away with a clear understanding of why it was what it was.

Fun toy for long term universes though, nothing wrong with that afaic.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis
JonInMiddleGA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2021, 07:59 AM   #3
QuikSand
lolzcat
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
I don't even know what sample size might be required to be comfortable with a baseline, but as long as everyone knew that the baseline is subject to some noise, that seems like it wouldn't be too misleading.

The GML runs a season every two weeks, we probably have 20-30 seasons worth of data that would be "modern FOF" and that much feels like it would be enough to have some confidence in.

I suspect the best we'd get perfect data on is <40, 40-49, and 50+ as distances, and that would be disappointing... but maybe we could draw it out into a formula and apply that to each yardage distance, specifically.
QuikSand is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 AM.



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.