THE Jarvis Landry Future Thread - News, Updates and Discussion

Problem is he isn't one of the hardest workers during the regular season. Supposedly he is one of the players that Gase was referring too when he was admonishing this offense for not studying and running wrong routes

 

Keyword = Supposedly

And I disagree, I bet Landry is one of the first ones in and last ones out. Guy loves football.

If he did run wrong routes, I couldn’t tell with the 112 catches he had. Hell, DeVante can run wrong routes too if it makes him look anything like a NFL WR. Go for it. At this point I’m willing to take that chance. Lmao

 

Here's something I'd like to know, but to lazy/busy to figure out: Is there a correlation b/w pass distribution and winning?

IOW, do offenses find more success via a WR superstar, or do they find it by getting more players involved overall in the process?.

 

More players involved is better. This is what I did. First I took receiving stats for 2017 from here:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/receiving.htm

Then I looked at correlations between win% and the percent of targets that went to the top N targeted players, where N goes from 1 to total number of players that were targeted (so if N = 2 that means it's the top 2 targeted players).

Now.. taken to the extreme, correlation between win% and the percent of targets for N = "ALL players targeted on that team" should be precisely 0 because for that maximum possible value of N the percent is 100% for every team, and of course if your stat is 100% for every team there is absolutely no predictive power => correlation = 0. So as N increases those numbers should naturally go towards zero (just giving you an intuition here).

Question is whether the correlation to top 1, top 2, top 3 is positive or negative. If it's positive then the more heavily you bias targets to fewer players the better, if it's negative then you're better of spreading the ball around.

Results: win% correlations in 2017 to top N targeted players for..
N=1: -0.3517
N=2: -0.4108
N=3: -0.2875
N=4: -0.1374
N=5: -0.1003
..

Well you see the pattern. The numbers get less negative the more you spread the ball around. Interestingly, the worst case is when you disproportionately target 2 players (could be RB, WR, or any type of player) rather than disproportionately targeting 1 player. Otherwise, things get better the more you spread things out.

EDIT: turns out I forgot to remove something in my code when calculating these correlations and these are actually decrements to expected win% based on maximum correlation observed.. in other words.. it's how much win% is hurt. See post #213 for the raw correlations.

 

You're the man.



This also finalizes my decision on our attempts in retaining Landry - next man up.

 

Oh.. this might interest you too. The Dolphins are currently 4th highest in percent of targets that the #1 target gets (Landry = 161 out of 557 total for the team = 28.9%) and also 3rd highest in percent of targets that the top 2 targeted players get (Landry and Stills = 161+105 out of 557 = 47.76%). In other words.. we're one of the worst teams in terms of ball distribution as it relates to win%.

(just for info.. that 557 doesn't include Ajayi because I left out all players that played on 2 or more teams)

 

Ahhh. Thanks again. That is very interesting.

 

Oh res, you broke my heart.

 

I would think the quality of QB making those throws would be a bigger factor. 2007 Brady had 578 attempts and targeted Moss & Welker 305 times.

 

True. Although in many instances during the Belichick/Brady era, they seem to stand as the exception.

 

Be careful asking stuff like that...because Cbrad will ALWAYS jump right on it to generate an answer. If you say something like, "I saw a Mexican Big Horn frog hop past my window right as Landry broke a tackle....could this be a result of voodoo controlling NFL outcomes?" Our man will do the math for months, if necessary, and spit out the precise scientific answer. So you need to be very careful what you ask for the sake of Cbrad's friends and family. =)

 

And I appreciate everything @cbrad brings to the table. It's awesome to have such in-depth analysis and statistics to compliment film study.

 

Good question.. but before I get to that I have to say it's good you got me to redo this analysis because I found out I couldn't reproduce the correlations in post #204 when attempting to do the same for 2007 lol..!!

So I searched for the damn code I had used (somewhere in trash) and it turns out post #204 actually lists decrements in correlation to expected win% given maximum correlation observed rather than raw correlations. It's equally relevant information so no real harm done, but the reason those numbers are negative is because that's how much it hurts win%. Stupid mistake I made due to not removing code I used to test something (just edited post #204 to make that clear).

Anyway, the actual correlations to the top N targets are mostly positive, but they tend to peak when you spread the ball out to 6-7 targets. Furthermore there is a tremendous amount of variation from year to year. You can see this below in the two plots. First plot shows the tremendous year-by-year variation from 2000-2017 and the second plot shows the average effect. I also added correlation to passer rating in that second graph.





So first thing to note is that, given NFL teams' actual distribution of talent at QB, WR, RB, etc.. the most effective ball distribution is when you have around 6-7 receiving targets that take up the great bulk of all targets.

Second thing to note is that the example with NE in 2007 is apparently an outlier because both 2006 and 2007 show relatively low correlations to win% when you only target a few players disproportionately.

Finally, the second graph shows a tight relationship, on average, between passer rating and top N receiving targets. The question here is whether it's the QB, the coach or the talent in receiving threats. I don't think we can tell because the coach will obviously influence what the QB does, but the talent available should influence a coach's game plan. But yes the relationship seems to be quite tight between ball distribution and QB performance (as well as overall team performance).

 

omfg......

 

Dude seriously...why are you here shouldn't you be off working for some kind of analytics website or something. Or figuring out the math to invent a real world flux capacitor so you can achieve time travel.

 

Thread

 

Oh, I do math research, mostly for improving data analysis in certain areas of medical research. So I've actually made discoveries that have improved on the prior state of the art in certain fields.

I guess the other thing I've done, though not as much right now, is mathematical modeling of the early stages of human visual processing (optics of the eye + how cells in your retina respond + predicting probability of detection of localized stimuli based on the known anatomy and physiology of the eye, etc..).

So this football stuff is just a hobby.. cuz I like the Dolphins! It also doesn't take anywhere near as much time as I think KeyFin was suggesting (the only real time consuming part is getting the database properly formatted, but that's a one-time thing and after that it's usually just 5-10 minutes of coding for those types of figures).

 

What cbrad is doing is better than all the analytics sites I read.

Mainly because he understands correlation is not causation, something other sites say but when you look at their analysis they don’t believe. The other is that he does multivariate analysis..

 

If I could beat one point into the entire collective unconscious of the online and social media world, it would be this point. Correlation is NOT causation. For the love of all that is holy! The dose makes the poison would be a close second.

 

What Cbrad does in his own time in his own bedroom is nobodies bizness but his, and whomsoever he may be conducting that bizness with. Don't be judging. We love him for who he is.

 

Is ‘t that polynomal variations? But I'm sure he does that too, the sicko.

 

Personally I prefer whole numbers, but fractions need luvin too.

 

I could never get into midget porn.

 

And the Racist A-Hole of the Year Award goes to....

That seriously cracked me up though!

 

and who were #1-3? Who were those team #1 WRs?

 

Or quality of WR. When your #1 is Julio or Antonio, it's still not ideal, but it's better than Landry

 

For N=1, the top teams/WR's were:
1) Houston's DeAndre Hopkins with 174 out of 507 targeted = 34.32%
2) Arizona's Larry Fitzgerald with 161 out of 525 targeted = 30.67%
3) Cincinnati's A.J. Green with 143 out of 479 targeted = 29.85%
4) Miami's Jarvis Landry with 161 out of 557 targeted = 28.9%

For N=2, the list is:
1) Carolina's McCaffrey and Funchess with (113+111)/425= 52.71%
2) Cincinnati's A.J. Green and Brandon LaFell with (143+89)/479 = 48.43%
3) Miami's Landry and Stills with (161+105)/557 = 47.76%

Again.. keep in mind I left out all players that played on 2 or more teams during the season, and that "targeted" is not the same as "passing attempts", though it's not too far off, because some passing attempts I guess didn't target a player.

 

Dolphins place non-exclusive franchise tag on Jarvis Landry.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000916892/article/dolphins-place-franchise-tag-on-jarvis-landry

Which sets him up to make 16 million in 2018 if he signs the tag.

 

YUUUUUUPPP! Saw this when my phone started blowing up from the NFL app. This makes me happy!
He gets PAID next year even more than he wanted...Well not more than he wanted I'm sure they would all love 30+ mil a year, but more than he was willing to settle for...and we get to keep a great player without a huge long term commitment while they figure out if he's in the plans. Man I want Landry to retire a Dolphin, but I get the business aspect. Hopefully they work out a deal this year before free agency hits again.

 

Hell. Yes.

 

Not a fan of this move unless it results in a trade.

 

Don't sell yourself short...

 

Dont like it but they didnt have a choice. The right move would have been extending him prior to last season. Now we are set in position to overpay him next offseason or lose him for nothing.

 

Why would he sign an extension prior to getting big bucks through the free agent market?

 

I guess that answers the question of how valuable the front office and Coach think he is, doesn't it. Now sign him to a three year deal worth 45 million and a 4th yr team option, guarantee half and give him a fat signing bonus and lets go win a Super Bowl!!!

 

Because in the NFL nothing is guaranteed. This isnt baseball or basketball, this is a dangerous sport and has ended people’s careers every season. Some because their body cant take it anymore, and some because while they have recovered, theyre afraid of that collision happening again.

Betting on yourself to continue playing without a longterm extension is beyond risky. It’s the difference between having 16 million guaranteed for one season on a franchise tag or 35 million guaranteed on a multi year deal.

He is taking a big risk if he signs that franchise tender.

Reshad Jones could have easily not signed his extension and instead waited for his big free agency moment which would have netted him more, but he wasn’t going to take that chance, get that long term deal theyre offering you now, cash in again when the time comes.

Steph Curry from the NBA is another example of this.