RE: General Vikes Talk

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: General Vikes Talk

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk

Page: << < prev 179 180 [181] 182 183 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:16:33 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs. I think you are projecting those 12 additional catches adding up to the 25 yards. That isn't the way it works.

< Message edited by kgdabom -- 5/18/2019 12:20:19 PM >

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4501

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:19:53 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

If they did, it would equal 63 for 730. It actually decreases the chances at picking up additional first downs.

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4502

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:23:26 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

If they did, it would equal 63 for 730. It actually decreases the chances at picking up additional first downs.

You're clearly not getting this. we aren't talking total yards we are talking yards per reception. 10*63 =630 not 730 you are correct. however it's 13 more plays at ten yards per play. about 7 more first downs.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4503

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:27:06 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4504

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:30:11 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

63-625 averages 10 YPR. It only accumulates 25 additional yards but it's 13 more receptions at 10 YPR. Maybe this will help. Lets take average out. 50 catches of 12 YPC 600 YARDS. We fully agree on that right. 63 receptions at 10 YPR 630 YARDS right. 63-50 = 13 right? That makes 13 more plays of 10 yards, but only accumulating 30 additional total yards.

< Message edited by kgdabom -- 5/18/2019 12:35:57 PM >

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4505

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:30:49 PM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9315
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs. I think you are projecting those 12 additional catches adding up to the 25 yards. That isn't the way it works.

here's a statistic that i don't think has been considered yet...'yards per target'....

of the top ten tight ends in receptions from last year (2018), only the following have more y/tgt than rudolph (7.7 yds) - that number is the best of rudolph's career....

travis kelse
george kettle
jared cook

those with less y/tgt that rudolph....

zach ertz
austin hooper
eric ebron
david njoku
jimmy graham
trey burton
jordan reed

< Message edited by ratoppenheimer -- 5/18/2019 12:32:28 PM >

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 4506

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:31:43 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

63-625 averages 10 YPR. It only accumulates 25 additional yards but it's 13 more receptions at 10 YPR.

25 does not equal 130

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4507

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:31:55 PM

Bruce Johnson

Posts: 16353
Joined: 8/27/2007
Status: offline

Even if we need to keep four TE's I still prefer to say goodbye to Rudy. I say that because I value blocking over a few catches. I don't think Rudy is a good fit for our scheme and I don't think he is going to be our number one TE option in the passing game anymore. He is getting starting pay, but I think of him as a really good backup. I would rather use the 7+ million in another way, including extending Morgan. If we do keep him, I completely understand and will root for him.

_____________________________

We live in a world where we depend upon each other. In other words, we need each other just as God needs us and we need Him. How wonderful it would be if we could unite and live in harmony. Wouldn't it be better that way?

Post #: 4508

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:33:42 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28246
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

If they did, it would equal 63 for 730. It actually decreases the chances at picking up additional first downs.

3rd and 7, 1 catch for 8 yards = 1 1st down. In the same scenario, 1 catch for 13 yards = 1 1st down.

Sure over time a higher YAC = a higher 1st down %. I'm betting though that getting 625 yards on on 63 catches almost certainly would yield more first downs than 625 yards on 50 catches.

Post #: 4509

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:38:58 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

63-625 averages 10 YPR. It only accumulates 25 additional yards but it's 13 more receptions at 10 YPR.

25 does not equal 130

never said it did. IT'S 13 ADDITIONAL PLAYS of 10 yards each but you subtract the additional 2*50 from the total yards. I haven't been talking total yards here. I've been talking additional ten yard catches.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4510

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:40:16 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

If they did, it would equal 63 for 730. It actually decreases the chances at picking up additional first downs.

3rd and 7, 1 catch for 8 yards = 1 1st down. In the same scenario, 1 catch for 13 yards = 1 1st down.

Sure over time a higher YAC = a higher 1st down %. I'm betting though that getting 625 yards on on 63 catches almost certainly would yield more first downs than 625 yards on 50 catches.

Take it from bigo pager.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4511

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:42:36 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs. I think you are projecting those 12 additional catches adding up to the 25 yards. That isn't the way it works.

here's a statistic that i don't think has been considered yet...'yards per target'....

of the top ten tight ends in receptions from last year (2018), only the following have more y/tgt than rudolph (7.7 yds) - that number is the best of rudolph's career....

travis kelse
george kettle
jared cook

those with less y/tgt that rudolph....

zach ertz
austin hooper
eric ebron
david njoku
jimmy graham
trey burton
jordan reed

great point yards per target is better than yards per reception in making the evaluation.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4512

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:42:59 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28246
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

Oh come on man. Don't make me defend KG.

He's saying that the 63 catches for 625 yards is 10 ypc. We could expect at 50 catches that would have yielded about 500 yards, and the additional 13 catches would add about 130 yards at 10 ypc for (very conservatively IMO) another 7 1st downs.

Post #: 4513

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:46:53 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

I'm not going to say it's disingenuous to discredit this guy based on his statement "50 catches for 600 yards". True Rudolf has never averaged 12 YPC in any season, but over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 63 catches for 625 yards. So if anything the guy actually understated what Rudolph is likely to do in 2019, IF we are basing it on his recent seasons. Yeah yeah I know, a year older, overdue for an injury, Smith will eat into those numbers... yac yac yac

Good straightforward unbiased summay, imo

Good summary as well. To me 63-625 is more impressive than 50-600. I prefer the 13 additional catches at 9.9 YPR compared to less at 12.
I still believe DF acted in bad faith.

Those 13 additional catches net 25 yards. I don't see that as understated. Would you rather have a RB that has a proportionately higher YPC, even with fewer carries? I would.

13 more catches at 10 rounded per catch is going to create about 7 more first downs. 63-625 is superior to 50-600.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

that's the average per catch. 10 yard receptions produce or lead to first downs most of the time. Some will be 15 some will be 5. reasonable guess 7 additional first downs.

Seriously?

Those 13 catches don't produce 10 more yards per catch.

If they did, it would equal 63 for 730. It actually decreases the chances at picking up additional first downs.

3rd and 7, 1 catch for 8 yards = 1 1st down. In the same scenario, 1 catch for 13 yards = 1 1st down.

Sure over time a higher YAC = a higher 1st down %. I'm betting though that getting 625 yards on on 63 catches almost certainly would yield more first downs than 625 yards on 50 catches.

You might be right, been a couple years since I last took a stats class.

The shorter the down and distance, the higher the conversion rate. You are basing it on quantity. Those 13 catches equal more first downs. I'm thinking of 1st and 2nd downs, where those extra YPR mean higher conversions on subsequent downs.

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4514

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:50:52 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

Oh come on man. Don't make me defend KG.

He's saying that the 63 catches for 625 yards is 10 ypc. We could expect at 50 catches that would have yielded about 500 yards, and the additional 13 catches would add about 130 yards at 10 ypc for (very conservatively IMO) another 7 1st downs.

That's not the argument. Would you rather have 50 for 600 vs 63 for 625? Of COURSE you would rather have 63 for 625 vs 50 for 500.

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4515

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:50:54 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

Even if we need to keep four TE's I still prefer to say goodbye to Rudy. I say that because I value blocking over a few catches. I don't think Rudy is a good fit for our scheme and I don't think he is going to be our number one TE option in the passing game anymore. He is getting starting pay, but I think of him as a really good backup. I would rather use the 7+ million in another way, including extending Morgan. If we do keep him, I completely understand and will root for him.

OK Bruce. Morgan and his 16 receptions 1 td over 3 years is more valuable than Rudy and his 204 receptions 19 tds over those same three years because Morgan blocks better.
RUDY is not a backup level TE by any stretch of the imagination and he is only paid what starting TEs are paid.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4516

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 12:57:21 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33584
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

Oh come on man. Don't make me defend KG.

He's saying that the 63 catches for 625 yards is 10 ypc. We could expect at 50 catches that would have yielded about 500 yards, and the additional 13 catches would add about 130 yards at 10 ypc for (very conservatively IMO) another 7 1st downs.

That's not the argument. Would you rather have 50 for 600 vs 63 for 625? Of COURSE you would rather have 63 for 625 vs 50 for 500.

You are correct. That is not the argument. The argument is more plays at 10 ypc is better than less plays at 12 ypc. The 13 extra good plays more than makes up for less plays at a better average. You've heard of possession receivers right. Keep the chains moving. That's what I'm talking about. Yes REGIS, FINAL ANSWER.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 4517

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:09:17 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

Oh come on man. Don't make me defend KG.

He's saying that the 63 catches for 625 yards is 10 ypc. We could expect at 50 catches that would have yielded about 500 yards, and the additional 13 catches would add about 130 yards at 10 ypc for (very conservatively IMO) another 7 1st downs.

That's not the argument. Would you rather have 50 for 600 vs 63 for 625? Of COURSE you would rather have 63 for 625 vs 50 for 500.

You are correct. That is not the argument. The argument is more plays at 10 ypc is better than less plays at 12 ypc. The 13 extra good plays more than makes up for less plays at a better average. You've heard of possession receivers right. Keep the chains moving. That's what I'm talking about. Yes REGIS, FINAL ANSWER.

I would guess that most possession receivers have higher YPR than 9.9.

You are taking a relatively small number of plays at high percent of value vs a relatively high number of plays at a smaller percent value. Unless you can prove ratio of YPR to value (1 YPR equals % increase) its impossible to call it anything other than speculation.

And I would need to see a p value of greater than 0.05

< Message edited by Pager -- 5/18/2019 2:11:03 PM >

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4518

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:17:08 PM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9315
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson

Even if we need to keep four TE's I still prefer to say goodbye to Rudy. I say that because I value blocking over a few catches. I don't think Rudy is a good fit for our scheme and I don't think he is going to be our number one TE option in the passing game anymore. He is getting starting pay, but I think of him as a really good backup. I would rather use the 7+ million in another way, including extending Morgan. If we do keep him, I completely understand and will root for him.

OK Bruce. Morgan and his 16 receptions 1 td over 3 years is more valuable than Rudy and his 204 receptions 19 tds over those same three years because Morgan blocks better.
RUDY is not a backup level TE by any stretch of the imagination and he is only paid what starting TEs are paid.

"The Vikings could, also, be looking to the tight end position early in the 2020 NFL Draft to find a running mate for Smith. Not only is Rudolph in the final year of his contract, but so is fellow tight end David Morgan. Since Smith can’t very well replace Morgan and Rudolph, should they both move on after 2019, there could be another opening at the position in the near future, too."

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 4519

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:21:53 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

Ok, now I'm obsessing about it. Median number of first downs last season gained by a team last yr was 332, well technically 332.5. 13 plays would be approx 4% of first down plays. How many of the those 13 plays either led to a first down or led to a subsequent first down. Vs 50 plays; 15% of first down plays. Would you take the union or intersection of those stats on subsequent impact of first downs?

Any stat majors in the house? I should email my college buddy, he earned a stats degree.

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4520

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:35:35 PM

jbusse

Posts: 1308
Joined: 9/11/2013
From: Atlanta, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

Am I in Bizarro world????

How can I explain it? The original number is 50 for 600. The revised is 63 for 625. It added 13 catches for 25 yards. Math does not allow you to assume those 13 catches add 10 per when the they actually added only 25 yards.

Seriously to protect my sanity, I either need to log out or someone other than KG tell me if my math skills are gone.

Oh come on man. Don't make me defend KG.

He's saying that the 63 catches for 625 yards is 10 ypc. We could expect at 50 catches that would have yielded about 500 yards, and the additional 13 catches would add about 130 yards at 10 ypc for (very conservatively IMO) another 7 1st downs.

That's not the argument. Would you rather have 50 for 600 vs 63 for 625? Of COURSE you would rather have 63 for 625 vs 50 for 500.

You are correct. That is not the argument. The argument is more plays at 10 ypc is better than less plays at 12 ypc. The 13 extra good plays more than makes up for less plays at a better average. You've heard of possession receivers right. Keep the chains moving. That's what I'm talking about. Yes REGIS, FINAL ANSWER.

A little different numbers, but I'd certainly prefer 50/600 to 60/600. Normally, these things are easier to see if you look at a more extreme example, e.g., 40/600 vs. 70/600 or 30/600 vs. 80/600. I think most would agree that 30/600 is preferred to 80/600. Would you rather have Randy Moss for 5 games or Rickey Young for the whole season?

Post #: 4521

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:44:18 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

Was trying to see if I could find date. Came across this interesting read:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/fo-basics

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4522

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:47:05 PM

David F.

Posts: 10833
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline

Higher yards per target is only better if there are also higher yards per catch. Throwing the ball five yards downfield with a 90% catch rate will generate a higher yards per target than the same amount of balls thrown twenty yards downfield with a 20% catch rate but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to only throw short. The occasional deeper shot opens up and enhances all the other aspects of the offense and keeps it from being predictable and containable.

Also, the goal of Vikings football isn't to maximize any one player's stats and in the case of our current discussion Kyle Rudolph. The goal is to win the game. I showed that Rudy has a low yds/catch and a low incidence of gaining a first down per catch. The fact that he can amass 40, 50, 60 catches is irrelevant because it isn't contributing to winning football. The fact that there is some sort of 'contract dispute' going on right now tells me that someone or someones in the Vikings organization has figured it out too. On Sirius NFL network they are bringing up Rudolph every 15 to 30 minutes. This means there is a lot of chatter going on. Take that for what it's worth.

Rudy is has been getting too much of the target share. It's given him above average to very good stats but hasn't translated to winning football. I'd rather see about 25% of those targets spread to Diggs, Thielen, Cook, and whoever is the other tight end on the field. God forbid we ever give up on Treadwell and see if we can find someone to give us production at WR3.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!

Post #: 4523

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 2:52:21 PM

marty

Posts: 12663
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

You're kidding Jordan Reed will miss about 15 games per season.

A fairly good chance, but if he played for a team which he felt were a contender [his subconscience mind believing it], he might stay healthy all the way to the Super Bowl.

_____________________________

SKOL to the BOWL !!!

Post #: 4524

RE: General Vikes Talk - 5/18/2019 3:08:19 PM

Pager

Posts: 10500
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

I don't have the skills or tools to actually build an analysis, and this is a very small sample size. So basically it means little; no standard deviation taken into account, etc.

Kyle's 2018, 64 for 634 yards: 9.9 YPR on 82 targets = 32 first downs.

Looking for a TE, looking for 50 receptions for 600 yards.

Vance McDonald had 50 receptions for 610 yards, 12.2 YPR on 72 targets. Had 33 first downs.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receptions/qualified/false/count/41

_____________________________

Left picking up the pieces.

Post #: 4525