|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Which teams are among the top five most analytically advanced? 1. Baltimore Ravens (23) 2. Cleveland Browns (20) 3. Philadelphia Eagles (18) T4. Buffalo Bills (7) T4. San Francisco 49ers (7) T6. Minnesota Vikings (6) T6. Seattle Seahawks (6) T8. Indianapolis Colts (5) T8. Los Angeles Rams (5) T8. New England Patriots (5) T11. Dallas Cowboys (4) T11. Miami Dolphins (4) T11. New York Giants (4) |
| Quote: |
| Which team is the least analytically advanced? 1. Washington Football Team (6) 2. Tennessee Titans (5) T3. Cincinnati Bengals (3) T3. New York Giants (3) |
I get it, but it's a helluva easier to make that decision when you have a cheetah at QB.
If results matter, which is the ultimate end game of analytics, then we simply can't be in the top five.
Quote:
The Giants were maybe the most stratified team in the survey, receiving four votes as one of the five most analytically advanced teams in the NFL and three votes as the least advanced.
If results matter, which is the ultimate end game of analytics, then we simply can't be in the top five.
Quote:
The Giants were maybe the most stratified team in the survey, receiving four votes as one of the five most analytically advanced teams in the NFL and three votes as the least advanced.
If results matter, which is the ultimate end game of analytics, then we simply can't be in the top five.
Why can't you make the right decision analytically even if it doesn't work? It still comes down to execution, no?
Granted this is Judge's first year, so 2020 doesn't apply, but I find it a very difficult sell to claim we are one of the five best analytically advanced teams based on what's occurred on the field the past decade.
It just doesn't pass the sniff test...
I guess the argument is we'd be 0-48 the last three years without analytics... ;)
Why can't you make the right decision analytically even if it doesn't work? It still comes down to execution, no?
Really? I mean, there is a pretty robust list of examples where the play-calling based on specific situations has been pretty poor.
True - execution is crucial. But you want to execute the right play at the right time.
Quote:
in these two games. That alone should tell you everything.
People said you were gone. Hello Terps.
Hi there. I won't post all that much. But if I don't vent over this bullshit somewhere I'm going to be sending my buddies 10000 word texts a couple times a week and they don't need that.
Quote:
Why can't you make the right decision analytically even if it doesn't work? It still comes down to execution, no?
Really? I mean, there is a pretty robust list of examples where the play-calling based on specific situations has been pretty poor.
True - execution is crucial. But you want to execute the right play at the right time.
I get what you're saying, but many times all we know is what we see. So I guess what I'm getting at is if were executed better or the way it was drawn up, it then looks better vs how it ultimately came out...if I'm making sense. I agree there's some head scratchers out there, but I think many times it can come down to simple execution and who is outplaying who (O vs D).
"There is a large spectrum of analytics work being done. You've got [a staffer on another team] with a Ph.D. And then you've got folks with analytics titles and they're ... not Ph.D.s," said one person. "There really is such a disparity in technical capabilities."
A lot of focus is put on the fact that DG built an analytics system in Carolina, but it's not a binary thing. Quality matters, technical capabilities matter. And the fact that he doesn't even understand how to properly use the word outlier doesn't say much about his ability usher in a system that relies heavily on math.
My point also always was that as bad as the Giants have been and having one of the best tech talent pools in the world, there isn't any reason they shouldn't be one of the leaders. Much is made of the 49ers turnaround and how it could be just around the corner for the Giants but while it might have seemed sudden to some, the 49ers made a huge commitment to analytics at a time the Giants turned to their past they made efforts to take big steps forward.
Should ownership be investing in this type of program? Of course. Are they already? We don't know. It takes time to put together that type of expert staff and they are taking a 200 million dollar loss with no fans and all this year so maybe there's a delay.
Should ownership be investing in this type of program? Of course. Are they already? We don't know. It takes time to put together that type of expert staff and they are taking a 200 million dollar loss with no fans and all this year so maybe there's a delay.
The Giants started doing that while Coughlin was here. They have been doing a lot of things, but since they have been losing we all see what impression this has left.
And if you try to say otherwise, we know what the retort is - "Well, then why are they still losing??" We'll see if those same individuals praise Cleveland for the work they are doing......
Quote:
I think the Giants are improving in this area under Judge.
Should ownership be investing in this type of program? Of course. Are they already? We don't know. It takes time to put together that type of expert staff and they are taking a 200 million dollar loss with no fans and all this year so maybe there's a delay.
The Giants started doing that while Coughlin was here. They have been doing a lot of things, but since they have been losing we all see what impression this has left.
And if you try to say otherwise, we know what the retort is - "Well, then why are they still losing??" We'll see if those same individuals praise Cleveland for the work they are doing......
Hey idiot, I know math and facts aren't really your things but if you didn't notice. The 8 teams above the Giants represent 5/6 Super Bowl participants and have a combined 193-125-2 record over the last two complete seasons 2018-2019. You would single out the Browns. The one team on that list under .500. You are such a joke
i think the whole analytics thing is about 20% useful info and 80% blowhard bullshit...
in the end the team that goes out and smacks the other team in the teeth will probably win.
i think the whole analytics thing is about 20% useful info and 80% blowhard bullshit...
in the end the team that goes out and smacks the other team in the teeth will probably win.
I think it's good to use data to guide decision making, I am not sure why anyone would be against it. Although, analytics is becoming a religion where people will go out of their to fight for it without thought. Data is behind, things change, people find new ways to do certain things better where there isn't any data for that specific approach. Data can be good as long as we aren't slaves to it.
The Giants started doing that while Coughlin was here. They have been doing a lot of things, but since they have been losing we all see what impression this has left.
And if you try to say otherwise, we know what the retort is - "Well, then why are they still losing??" We'll see if those same individuals praise Cleveland for the work they are doing......
Doing "a lot of things" and doing those things well (or right) are certainly different.
It's one thing to collect a lot of data. It's another thing to know how to translate it, coordinate it, and then implement it effectively.
There is a lot of respect around the league for Andrew Berry and his forward thinking...
Why would that tell all there is to know (exaggeration)?
If analytics says to not run on 2nd and 10, I am guessing defenses know this too.
Quote:
In comment 14983567 jsuds said:
Quote:
I think the Giants are improving in this area under Judge.
Should ownership be investing in this type of program? Of course. Are they already? We don't know. It takes time to put together that type of expert staff and they are taking a 200 million dollar loss with no fans and all this year so maybe there's a delay.
The Giants started doing that while Coughlin was here. They have been doing a lot of things, but since they have been losing we all see what impression this has left.
And if you try to say otherwise, we know what the retort is - "Well, then why are they still losing??" We'll see if those same individuals praise Cleveland for the work they are doing......
Hey idiot, I know math and facts aren't really your things but if you didn't notice. The 8 teams above the Giants represent 5/6 Super Bowl participants and have a combined 193-125-2 record over the last two complete seasons 2018-2019. You would single out the Browns. The one team on that list under .500. You are such a joke
WTF kind of response is that?? You are one of the people continually saying the Giants have done nothing or little and point to the results as proof.
"Math and facts"?? Hehe
And this is the post that hits the nail on the head regarding the survey.
I've consistently talked about two things.
1. Results on the field
2. Technical qualifications
The Giants have had someone in charge of their analytics operation for 5 years, maybe the worst period in team history. This person recently got a promotion and I guess more people hired under him? He has very underwhelming technical qualifications and experience for his position.
You are the one that constantly tries to twist my words into saying they were doing nothing. When I've repeated time and time again that even a pivot table is analytics, no one would suggest they were doing literally nothing. I was questioning the quality and I and others provided a lot of evidence as to why we questioned it.
You point to things like an old article about DG setting up an analytics system earlier. I've heard him called a "pioneer" by someone associated with the team. I'm sure he set up something, but the fact that he doesn't even understand what an outlier is doesn't speak to the quality of anything he sets up really. Among other things he's done and said. (His refusal to trade down despite incredibly statistical arguments in favor of this is a prime example) Ignoring RB data and picking Saquon 2nd is another. He admitted as much this past offseason, that he overlooked this area.
Why do you come here to continue to make terrible points?
You see Gettleman called a pioneer and instead of using that as a positive data point, you reject it. And you say you are a man of logic. The fuck you are.
A simple question: Why does the idea that the Giants aren't terrible at analytics threaten you??
Maybe because you'd rather appear right (and continually post your resume when called a poseur) rather than come to grips with the fact that you have been off base for awhile now. I'll leave you with this. Buffalo is on that list. Who implemented their analytics system??
Exactly. Just as Zeke pointed out above.
Confirmation bias lives on!!!
And I hold Alastair in high regard. He's from the UK - where PFF originated!!
They seem very content to be mediocre, which is not really a good way to catch up to the top teams.
Seems some don't even view them as mediocre.
And no this doesn't change anything. No one is relying on this as the sole basis for their opinion. It's combined with other research to form opinions.
My point has always been they could be doing a lot more and I was nothing but 100% correct about that. You two were in the, they are doing plenty camp, they have the right people, etc.
And that continues to be the basis of contention.
You take these little pot shots all the time but on this debate you were on the wrong side of it. And other than complete hyperbole like suggesting I've said teams do zero analytics, something I've logically refuted many times, that's all you've got. Stupid little pot shots.
You ever see that South Park episode in the future? Where insteads of religion they fight over their "science".
That is essentially what could be happening in this survey. Which would explain why you have the massive discrepancy of the Giants simultaenously having a near top 10 rating for top 5 advaned team in NFL and being the actual worst.
How many times have I had to reproduce that quote before it sinks in? A man of logic sure has a fucked-up memory recall.
And that continues to be the basis of contention.
What exactly have I been wrong about? This idea that i'd suggest anyone doesn't do analytics at all is insane. No one would suggest that, to anyone that isn't trying to be a contentious asshole it was abundantly clear I was talking about quality and I was very clearly right to question the quality.
Quote:
Of a bunch of analytics proponents (and Let's be fair there is value here but not in slavish regard) taking a non-analytical input tremendously seriously is just hilarious. It is as flawed an input to a scientific process as I could think of.
You ever see that South Park episode in the future? Where insteads of religion they fight over their "science".
That is essentially what could be happening in this survey. Which would explain why you have the massive discrepancy of the Giants simultaenously having a near top 10 rating for top 5 advaned team in NFL and being the actual worst.
Zeke - it seemingly aligns to how many posters think the Giants are doing a good job improving the team, but are actually doing the worst.
Maybe because you'd rather appear right (and continually post your resume when called a poseur) rather than come to grips with the fact that you have been off base for awhile now. I'll leave you with this. Buffalo is on that list. Who implemented their analytics system??
You're kidding, right?
The elevation of the Bills Analytics Dept was the hiring of Luis Guilamo. Guy has a B.S. in electrical engineering and computer engineering and an MBA. His background is in business intelligence and IT.
So where is any mention of Gettleman in the article below? And all of his outstanding work...
No Mention of Gettleman's work? - ( New Window )
There's a lot of mention of Brandon Beane though. Wonder who mentored him??
That seems to clearly suggest Ole Dave put everything together and now the Bills are reaping the dividends.
Yet, the article seems to suggest they really started to build it out in 2018.
My bad...
This is exactly what I wrote:
My point being to NGD is a guy who "shunned analytics" implemented the program in Carolina and his protege established a system in Buffalo when he arrived there.
And I'll repeat that NGD used Gettleman's mockery of analytics in a press conference to use it as evidence he shunned them and didn't use them in Carolina. He continues to put more value in words over actions.
There's a lot of mention of Brandon Beane though. Wonder who mentored him??
On player evaluation/scouting or analytics?
Sports medicine and sports science?
In-game tendencies and play calling?
Player evaluation week to week?
When to sign guys, when to let them walk?
Cap allocation by position and by player?
Scouting and drafting?
Coach evaluation year to year?
Given how many areas could be influenced by analytics, it would be easy to be strong in some areas and weak in others.
We longtime Giants fans know that the organization is very softhearted toward longtime staffers and ex-players. We love that when it's "Once a Giant, always a Giant," and we hear that they're taking care of a onetime player who's fallen on hard times. But we hate it when it's cronyism in the scouting, front office and other departments, and the team falls behind the competition because they won't let guys go. From the outside, it looks like both are true, and it looks like that will continue to be the case as long as the current generation of Maras runs things.
I think that given the choice of the Giants way or the best way, they'll choose the Giants way. Fortunately for us, the Giants way isn't a complete catastrophe, the way it was in the 1970s. But measured by success on the field, it hasn't been a good way for a long time.
Quote:
In comment 14983519 Go Terps said:
Quote:
in these two games. That alone should tell you everything.
People said you were gone. Hello Terps.
Hi there. I won't post all that much. But if I don't vent over this bullshit somewhere I'm going to be sending my buddies 10000 word texts a couple times a week and they don't need that.
I appreciate the contrarian views in a deep sea of group think. Do your thing buddy.
What is the quality of the analytics he set up in Carolina and New York? What did he learn?
The declining value of RBs is one of the most fundamental and famous points for analytics systems.
Another one is the value of trading down.
He takes a RB #2, has never traded down, how is that not shunning analytics? He's shunning the concepts.
When I spoke up I saw the Giants bungling basic timeout usage, which is such a simple concept any advanced game management system would understand timeouts in it's earliest days, it's the most basic football math.
How could you not question the quality of a system that doesn't seem to understand and APPLY the basic concepts that many in the analytics field agree on? Isn't rejecting or not showing you can effectively apply concepts others have a form of shunning?
What's more, he mocks people in the field publicly typing on a fake QB when asked the obvious question about him seemingly rejecting conventional wisdom people that have advanced the conversation. That's the point i've made, the Giants had 3 people rate them in the bottom of the league, analytics professionals in the NFL. That perception matters. It matters when you are trying to hire talent. As the article talks about technical capabilities, those with the most talent in areas that are needed for advanced analytics have a great many options. Do you think they want to work for someone that mocks their field?
You can invest in something and still shun the information it produces. You can invest in something and lack commitment to it, the kind of commitment you need to be successful in it. It's not just the mockery, it's that combined with his actions and the results on the field. You might thing shun is too strong, but he certainly was a lot closer to that than being the embracer you make him out to be. People that embrace innovation don't really find themselves apologizing for not paying more attention to it.
It's truly amazing how you still want to draw attention to yourself in this conversation because your position is so unbelievably dumb. But like a pet or child that misbehaves you don't seem to care if you attract positive or negative attention.
Who really cares what Gettleman did in Carolina, who he mentored, and what those people did after? What has Gettleman achieved as the Giants GM? Has he built a program that rigorously collects data, has the expertise to analyze it, and the wherewithal to use and not the outputs at the right times?
Rehashing something NGD said like 3 years ago, and just tirelessly and repeatedly carpet bombing every thread that mentions analytics with the same old tired insults, has got to get boring at some point, no?
FatMan in Charlotte : 10/1/2018 8:40 pm : link
you are stating things you know jackshit about
You keep saying that Gettleman shuns analytics and did nothing in Carolina. You said "Nothing!!". I know for a fact that he did things. I'm not an analytics expert, but I'm close to the Panthers!!
You continually reference knowledge of cloud architecture and setting up analytic systems. You have said you are an expert. What does that have to do with refuting that Gettleman hates analytics and "did nothing" in Carolina, a complete falsehood?
You keep saying I'm a luddite and out of my league, but exactly what more do I have to do to make your statement that Gettleman shuns analytics to be a steaming pile of shit?
NoGainDayne : 10/1/2018 8:52 pm : link
You are a luddite and an idiot. Why have you not crawled back in your luddite cave yet? You called me an ill informed idiot but it is you who is the idiot time and again. The GM of the Giants openly mocked the need for analytics and there is no evidence that exists that he used analytics in Carolina.. The way he mocks advanced analytics professionals reflects that he has not worked with talented ones or understands what it takes to recruit them. We don't have qualified people here and we need to see that Giants page updating with real technical minds soon. There's a technological war being waged and we don't have any weapons.
But a foul-mouthed idiot said things have been done.
FatMan in Charlotte : 10/1/2018 9:06 pm : link
purposely dense? I posted an article that showed Gettleman implemented the analytics program in Carolina!!
NoGainDayne : 10/1/2018 9:17 pm : link
I googled several teams followed by "analytics software" and the Jags, Pats and Eagles all have glowing reviews of what they are doing with analytics. The Giants? Nothing shows up. When you do it for the Carolina Panthers you see only articles on what the Florida Panthers are doing.
Why should I believe an article posted by a disingenuous luddite? There is no evidence Carolina did anything under Gettleman
You've continued the charade for over 2 years that you didn't say Gettleman didn't do anything in Carolina, even after you were shown proof! Then you ignorantly ignored the proof. The above is proof of that ignorance.
Keep that in mind when you act as if you never claimed certain things - the very thing that drew me into this ridiculous debate at the beginning!
When some jackass continually refers to being right, when he was clearly wrong - and on a lot of the analytics stuff - I'm going to point it out.
Also post the whole thread if you want to quote random parts of it, you just don't want people to see the rest of the context. You guys came at me like a pack of wild dogs. Believe it or not my full time job isn't to validate my theories about football analytics. Most of the time I'm cranking out text, I type and think fast, I'm not going to sit here and edit every post when you are throwing childish insults at me.
The meaning of everything I said holds. I've made the argument again here about the meaning. You just don't get it. You don't seem to get anything that doesn't revere the Giants.
Just sayin'
Oh and I agree with NGD on one thing. Fats doesn't care whether he gets positive or negative attention. Just as long as he gets attention... He never actually stakes out a position directly. He just attacks people whose opinions he dislikes. Then when the other person is correct, he can always claim he never took the opposite position, only that the poster was F'ed up. Fats types an awful lot, but if you really look at it, he says next to nothing, and his only purpose is to brew division, and argument. Watch him more carefully. And you know what we always say around here. Stop feeding the trolls.
You take these little pot shots all the time but on this debate you were on the wrong side of it. And other than complete hyperbole like suggesting I've said teams do zero analytics, something I've logically refuted many times, that's all you've got. Stupid little pot shots.
I don't want to position you as anything. We're on the same side. Analytics is valuable and we should get as good at it as we can be and use it as one of several decision-making stands such as scouting, personality, chemistry etc.
My issue in so much as there is one is this piece of analysis is a terrible example of analytics. The Giants show up in both the top ten and the worst ten. Every team state they do analytics to a certain level but believe only 50% of the league do. It's a worthless survey.
"NEVER stakes out a position directly"??
My position was crystal-clear on this argument from Day 1. Gettleman instituted the analytics program in Carolina. It was to directly refute the claim he didn't. It wasn't an opinion - it was a fact.
A guy crapped on Gettleman for words used in a press conference and then came to conclusions he passed off as fact that differed greatly from reality. A reality I knew because I had direct ties to what Carolina was doing at that time.
I staked my position very clearly. I think some of you guys just don't like being called on the bullshit
When some jackass continually refers to being right, when he was clearly wrong - and on a lot of the analytics stuff - I'm going to point it out.
But don't you see the tailspin every one of these threads goes into, and the two of you literally have a paragraphs long rehashing of the same endless points?
Seriously, what is the value you think there is in pointing it out?
I see way to much supposition, emotional hot takes, bad faith arguments, tons of speculation instead of facts, ego, logic leaps to consider any of the frequent posters on the subject analytically sound and critical thinkers on the site and likely in life patterns.
So hence the rationale in not even trying
Quote:
it goes directly to his repeated assertions that Gettleman shunned analytics - the backbone of nearly all of his arguments. It also shows how little tied in he is on analytics in the NFL.
When some jackass continually refers to being right, when he was clearly wrong - and on a lot of the analytics stuff - I'm going to point it out.
But don't you see the tailspin every one of these threads goes into, and the two of you literally have a paragraphs long rehashing of the same endless points?
Seriously, what is the value you think there is in pointing it out?
Re-read the thread. Who is the one that said "Hey idiot, I know math and facts aren't really your thing" when I wasn't even addressing him.
Heck, my position was the same as Zeke and EA - why is a subjective survey being used by proponents of analytics to come to any sort of conclusion?
Quote:
I think the Giants are improving in this area under Judge.
Should ownership be investing in this type of program? Of course. Are they already? We don't know. It takes time to put together that type of expert staff and they are taking a 200 million dollar loss with no fans and all this year so maybe there's a delay.
The Giants started doing that while Coughlin was here. They have been doing a lot of things, but since they have been losing we all see what impression this has left.
And if you try to say otherwise, we know what the retort is - "Well, then why are they still losing??" We'll see if those same individuals praise Cleveland for the work they are doing......
Yes, I think the Browns deserve praise for building what seems to be a quality system. The article mentioned Dorsey ignored them. Good processes don’t necessarily lead to good outcomes.
I’ll admit, reading the article was a bit humbling - the people asked didn’t seem to have a good view on what other teams were doing (the range of rankings for the Giants and the question on player-tracking data were two examples).
I don’t like Siam’s background for his role (a point we disagree on), but the Giants seem to be making more hires in this direction.
Still I think there are certain traits players need and processes that football teams need to be able to do for success. Analytics can certainly be part of the overall effort imo.
Talent first and good coaching is supreme. This issue I take with these type of lists is that they seem to make analytics the driving factor and not talent.
I see way to much supposition, emotional hot takes, bad faith arguments, tons of speculation instead of facts, ego, logic leaps to consider any of the frequent posters on the subject analytically sound and critical thinkers on the site and likely in life patterns.
My post was not intended to apply only to this subject with reference to Fats. I was speaking to his modus operendi in general. As far as bad "hot takes", and bad posts in general, I think we are capable of policing such without Fats' help. And we can certainly do it in a more constructive tone than he brings to the table.
Quote:
imo, from now many many examples, the last paragraph of your 240am post applies to a lot of posts and a lot of posters when it comes to this subject.
I see way to much supposition, emotional hot takes, bad faith arguments, tons of speculation instead of facts, ego, logic leaps to consider any of the frequent posters on the subject analytically sound and critical thinkers on the site and likely in life patterns.
My post was not intended to apply only to this subject with reference to Fats. I was speaking to his modus operendi in general. As far as bad "hot takes", and bad posts in general, I think we are capable of policing such without Fats' help. And we can certainly do it in a more constructive tone than he brings to the table.
Also, Fats is the king of bad faith arguments and non sequiturs, on this topic for example, he brings up the "fact" that DG "implemented" a system for analytics witht he panthers without ever defining what that system was. For all we know he had Larry, Moe and Curly mapping out play call tendencies for opposing team. Play calling tendencies is a form of analytics that has been happening in the NFL forever, even if it wasn't always codified and documented. He also doesn't explain how whatever was implemented was applied. Without the details, this so called "fact" is a red herring and provides no insight to how DG actually thinks about and approaches analytics. In his time with the NYG, we have precious little to say that he embraces analytics, and several data points that he doesn't make much use of them. Perhaps the most damning of which has the team making the moves they did to bolster that dept. this off season. Perhaps you should apply your considerable intellect to making suggestions to Fats on how he can become a better poster, because all he is now is a troll.
Well, the subject wasn't how good of a system Gettleman started. NGD only now made it clear he was talking about a quality system instead of just any analytical system.
This is how I see it and have viewed it. In my view NGD moved the goalposts of the argument.
This is exactly what I wrote:
Quote:
I'll leave you with this. Buffalo is on that list. Who implemented their analytics system??
My bad. I read misread your comment. I thought you were suggesting Gettleman was responsible for the Bills now being so highly recognized for their analytics work.
I recall that after Gettleman got dismissed from Carolina he did consulting work for Buffalo. And I was thinking you were sort of crediting him for that...
Quote:
where did I say Gettleman implemented their system?
This is exactly what I wrote:
Quote:
I'll leave you with this. Buffalo is on that list. Who implemented their analytics system??
My bad. I read misread your comment. I thought you were suggesting Gettleman was responsible for the Bills now being so highly recognized for their analytics work.
I recall that after Gettleman got dismissed from Carolina he did consulting work for Buffalo. And I was thinking you were sort of crediting him for that...
You’re getting soft
^ This...
Who cares what he did in Carolina
The onus wasn't on me to define the system used. It wasn't even to argue that it was a quality system. The original argument was that Gettleman shunned analytics and Carolina didn't have a system in place. That was totally false. Hell, why is "fact" in quotations above? He implemented a system - that IS a fact.
Just above, crick recapped the argument well.
If somebody comes on the board and proclaims themselves an expert and then can't even get basic information correct - why should their takes be worth a damn??
And what does this point even mean? Is the inference that an analytics program will pay immediate dividends or the results can somehow be seen tangibly??
That's the thing. If he has, the results certainly have't manifested with the product on the field. Not with personnel decisions, game management, coaching decisions, etc.
Parcells said you are what your record says you are. I think that should extend to our analytics results to date. Just the absolute pits.
Isn’t that tangible?
1) I avoid trolls and those who have no self awareness (a very overlapping Venn diagram)
2) I do take time for posters who seem like they can self learn their way out of cul-de-sacs, add capacity and wisdom ( not IQ or facts but wisdom).
3) My post was addressed to you and not FMIC.
A fundamental analytical in seeing through human dynamics is that humans object and are uncomfortable with behavior in others that they know best because they semi or unconsciously have precisely the same tendencies. Its a puzzle they can't solve so they also return to the scene and people of their struggles with their own flaws over and over again hoping to break through by self will run riot. It never works.
You can find this dynamic masterfully discussed by Homer, Buddha, Confucius, Plato, St Augustine, Marcus Aurelius, Shakespeare and John Stuart Mill.
Armed with more rigor, in the last 60 years, many from the Harvard School of Psychology ( Med School Division) like Kemper, Winograd, Goldman, Thurman and Epstein have explained and exposed this dynamic. And ways to get past it.
In the last 10 years have seen the Rutgers, Pittsburgh School of Medicine and North Carolina University Cognitive Science Departments ( top 5 schools in Cog Science) research and write about it ( Dennett, Flanagan etc).
BBI is an endless display of this phenomenon.
All of the above would advise humility and stillness to self observe.
I will include for completeness two opinions so you and anyone else can understand where i come from on this and then leave so I can spend energy elsewhere:
1A) no one here ( including myself) knows enough about the NYGiants ànd the state and utility of their efforts in analytics or statistics ( and its a rapidly moving target) to be talking authoritatively. The willingness to discuss based on pure emotional speculation, huge assumptions and the barest of coincidence and correlation that is visible is a sign of non analytical non critical thinkers. Flakes based thinking and noise.
2) Forgetting FMIC on style points, I submit that many are actually more upset at their pomposity and foolish emotes being held up to light so clearly. In sum they don't like getting exposed but can't say that so they focus and attack the way it was done.
Better to say nothing and trust others can see interpersonal violations than open our mouths and prove we are equally in a ditch where we started the first shovel into our 99 ditch on the subject.
All the best to, and for you, McL.
The people claiming to be very knowledgeable on the subject have admitted they don't know the depth of what the giants are doing. I've admitted that. I've had two main points all along
1) Gettleman implemented an analytics department in Carolina
2) If we don't know the extent of the Giants analytics effort, why are there definitive statements regarding it?
And the offshoots of this bad faith discussion has been delving into the LinkedIn profile of Tyseer Siam, saying that just because systems are implemented doesn't make them good, and a lot of self-promoting posts on the qualifications on why people are experts in this field and their opinions shouldn't be challenged.
I still don't know why when there's information that comes out that the Giants use analytics that you guys flock here to refute it. It is like you feel like your credibility has been taken away or something.
The bottom line is this whole subject has been argued in bad faith and even the supposed analytics experts on this board still don't know the extent of what the Giants are doing (nor do I).
- Medicine & health
- Resource allocation & value
- Predictive & probabilistic strategy
Teams have been collecting, analyzing, and using data in these arenas for years. So claiming a team has done nothing or that a contemporary GM started it recently are both silly and disingenuous claims.
Now if the argument is who put the names and the roles on the org chart and door, that's different. Do note the activity and achievement paradox again.
Among that list, too little emphasis is put on the last bullet, not enough is put on the first. The second is probably the one where a fan can see the results pretty clearly without inside access.
For example:
- 8th year left tackle at 4/62/35G -- bad value
- 5th year corner at 3/43/32G -- good value
And then the team made some hires this off-season (indicating they weren't just saying things to placate the media/fans).
I don't think anyone's arguing the Giants are the best. I don't think anyone's arguing they're doing absolutely nothing.
Probably the most informative 30 seconds in the last 8 years of Giants football.
1) I avoid trolls and those who have no self awareness (a very overlapping Venn diagram)
2) I do take time for posters who seem like they can self learn their way out of cul-de-sacs, add capacity and wisdom ( not IQ or facts but wisdom).
3) My post was addressed to you and not FMIC.
A fundamental analytical in seeing through human dynamics is that humans object and are uncomfortable with behavior in others that they know best because they semi or unconsciously have precisely the same tendencies. Its a puzzle they can't solve so they also return to the scene and people of their struggles with their own flaws over and over again hoping to break through by self will run riot. It never works.
You can find this dynamic masterfully discussed by Homer, Buddha, Confucius, Plato, St Augustine, Marcus Aurelius, Shakespeare and John Stuart Mill.
Armed with more rigor, in the last 60 years, many from the Harvard School of Psychology ( Med School Division) like Kemper, Winograd, Goldman, Thurman and Epstein have explained and exposed this dynamic. And ways to get past it.
In the last 10 years have seen the Rutgers, Pittsburgh School of Medicine and North Carolina University Cognitive Science Departments ( top 5 schools in Cog Science) research and write about it ( Dennett, Flanagan etc).
BBI is an endless display of this phenomenon.
All of the above would advise humility and stillness to self observe.
I will include for completeness two opinions so you and anyone else can understand where i come from on this and then leave so I can spend energy elsewhere:
1A) no one here ( including myself) knows enough about the NYGiants ànd the state and utility of their efforts in analytics or statistics ( and its a rapidly moving target) to be talking authoritatively. The willingness to discuss based on pure emotional speculation, huge assumptions and the barest of coincidence and correlation that is visible is a sign of non analytical non critical thinkers. Flakes based thinking and noise.
2) Forgetting FMIC on style points, I submit that many are actually more upset at their pomposity and foolish emotes being held up to light so clearly. In sum they don't like getting exposed but can't say that so they focus and attack the way it was done.
Better to say nothing and trust others can see interpersonal violations than open our mouths and prove we are equally in a ditch where we started the first shovel into our 99 ditch on the subject.
All the best to, and for you, McL.
Bill,
I understand what you are saying, however, I would submit that you have not seen me behave the way Fats does towards anybody but Fats himself. I have run into loads of Fats type people in my life.... Unfortunately. I have found the best way to deal with the bully is to punch them back in the nose, preferably using their own tactics against them. I will say this, Fats is one stubborn SOB. Most would have given up by now.
If you want to come up with some psycho babble to describe me, your are off the mark, and should probably take your own advice about sticking to what you know. It would be closer to the mark to say that as a child who suffered through some early illnesses that stunted my growth until I hit puberty, that I was often the victim of jerks like Fats. As a result I have a very low tolerance for it. And, while most just walk away from people like that, most figure it's easier to just avoid, I saw close up just how that behavior enables them. The jerks like Fats are toxic to our whole culture. Just look at the culture here on BBI. How many have copied Fats? So... I speak out against it. And quite frankly, I am also self aware enough to know that I really don't give a shit what people on a message board think of me for doing so. On the other hand, I do wonder about the psychology of those who enable the jerks.
For example, never once have I seen you address Fats on how to be a better poster. Why "Fogetting the style points"? "Better to say nothing"? Just allow it to poison the well? Why? Its all about style. Your very next point is that people don't like to be called out for bad style.
Look, this is a message board. Most people don't craft their posts like they are submitting a paper to be graded in Compositional Writing 421... People just dash things off. Sometimes opinions may come out in a way that can be interpreted as more forceful than intended. I know I am guilty of this. Then you get Fats jumping down your throat about some minutiae buried in what you said, when in all likelihood he is interpreting something the worst possible way, and not at all the that it was intended. This whole stupid argument with NGD stems from NGD saying that DG doesn't embrace analytics or some such thing. Yeah,maybe it was said with some emotional hyperbole. The thing is the concept of analytics is so broad that it can be said that we all use various forms of it practically everyday of our lives without really thinking about it. Figuring out how much you can spend on groceries every week is a form of analytics. So sure, Fats can find an example of something said in a paper years before he was with the Giants about DG "implementing" analytics. Nothing has ever been said about what it was, how it was used, or how successful it was. Maybe they helped him figure out his groceries. Its a pointless point to just make NGD look bad. I suspect NGD was focusing on DG's time with the Giants, and that even if something was done in NC, it wasn't what NGD likes to focus on which is game theory. NGD tried to explain by giving examples where game theory would have led to an alternative decision. But once Fats drags somebody down a rabbit hole, even if that person tries to clarify, Fats won't let it go... I will grant you that NGD has not always handled his side of this argument with grace either, and some of his posts are not carefully worded and can be taken as hyperbolic. But make no mistake, it was Fats that dragged it down into the rabbit hole, and 2 years on, Fats is still not willing to just let it go.
You said "Better to say nothing and trust others can see interpersonal violations". How come this doesn't apply to Fats? Frankly, you have supported Fats at times. Perhaps you should consider why you did that. You lost credibility by doing that.
- Medicine & health
- Resource allocation & value
- Predictive & probabilistic strategy
Teams have been collecting, analyzing, and using data in these arenas for years. So claiming a team has done nothing or that a contemporary GM started it recently are both silly and disingenuous claims.
Now if the argument is who put the names and the roles on the org chart and door, that's different. Do note the activity and achievement paradox again.
Among that list, too little emphasis is put on the last bullet, not enough is put on the first. The second is probably the one where a fan can see the results pretty clearly without inside access.
For example:
- 8th year left tackle at 4/62/35G -- bad value
- 5th year corner at 3/43/32G -- good value
Thank you christian for an excellent post which jives with my comment about NGD's intent. As you said it's a matter of what checks the box for you. Part of the problem is that we don't share a common language to explain the specific boxes we want checked. So no matter how much some folks try to explain what they want to see from analytics, there is always somebody pointing out that the team is using analytics in some other form... And it goes on for years with people talking past each other.
NGD and McL, not referring to you all.
Quote:
and bitching by some on this thread.
NGD and McL, not referring to you all.
NP, I didn't think it was.
But its ok to take a logic leap and speculate anyway?
Thats part of my point to you. This discussion with this poster leaves you not at your best
And Its not psycho-babble. Its based on how humans learn, process and reach their ability to be mindful or not. Notice how few people I mentioned are psychologists?
And lastly, you explained perfectly exactly the phenomenon...replaying an old thing that bothers you ( obviously sorry that happened to you and sorry your options for straightening it out at the time were limited (as they are now on a website forum)) over and over again in only slightly different settings that take you from a smart guy on top of things to a stressful (for you)scramble that goes nowhere.
You deserve better. So take care and boundary better.
Or dont. ( shrugs)
Why do you also misrepresent the way NGD posts? You do realize that at one time, he called anyone who disagreed with him "luddites" and "ignorant". Looks like you also are guilty of supporting poor behavior, but since it was directed at me - that's cool, right?
I'm friends with a lot of people on this board. I've been to games with people here. I've been to weddings of people here. I've helped out some that needed it. People have helped me out. I've also unfortunately had more people pass than I would like here and have attended funerals of people in this community. You think people are voluntarily inviting an asshole to things? You should probably lecture them too.
You think my takes are shit and I think your takes are shit. Does it really matter if that perception is delivered politely or crassly? Just because you don't like the way I address you doesn't mean that others should dislike it as well. That's the freedom the board has. If you think I'm a bully, that's your perogative. That does not mean it should be everyone else's.
But its ok to take a logic leap and speculate anyway?
Thats part of my point to you. This discussion with this poster leaves you not at your best
And Its not psycho-babble. Its based on how humans learn, process and reach their ability to be mindful or not. Notice how few people I mentioned are psychologists?
And lastly, you explained perfectly exactly the phenomenon...replaying an old thing that bothers you ( obviously sorry that happened to you and sorry your options for straightening it out at the time were limited (as they are now on a website forum)) over and over again in only slightly different settings that take you from a smart guy on top of things to a stressful (for you)scramble that goes nowhere.
You deserve better. So take care and boundary better.
Or dont. ( shrugs)
You are right, I don't know if you have private conversations with Fats. If you are, its not doing much good.
And of course I explained my own psychology perfectly. I am well aware of it, and yes, aware that there are behaviors that "trigger". I can chose to walk away. I have done so at time with Fats. But I believe he needs to be called out or you are just enabling him. Perhaps instead of whatever you say privately with him and supporting him publicly, you should consider taking a stand publicly and setting an example that his behavior is not tolerated. By not doing so, Fats continues, and other become mini-Fats trying to emulate him because somehow they think he is the cool kid. Perhaps if more people who are aware, stand up and say that it is unacceptable, we can move to a better overall culture and discourse.
Or not...
Shrugs...
Probably the most informative 30 seconds in the last 8 years of Giants football.
I definitely remember Mara saying that.
With all of the uncertainty of the pandemic, and how it has completely upended profession football in so many ways, I would bet a significant amount of money that Mara will essentially say the same thing in January 2021. And use that as a reason to keep Gettleman in his GM chair for at least another year...
Further, I also hear this in Mara's words as well. He likes what Gettleman has done and he doesn't want to risk (or maybe even spend extra money) changing it with someone else from the outside, who would rightfully want to have their own grading system, process, technology approach, etc. So the best way to avoid that is to promote from within. And that clearly means Abrams is the next in line.
So the Gettleman legacy is very likely going to be here for a long, long time...
I do not have issues behaving like Fats in general. I only do it him. As I said, to punch him in the nose with his own tactics. I find it ironic that you call me out for doing it to just him. You don't see me doing it with other posters. But when I *respond* to him in kind, you call me out, and not him... At the very least why not call out both? Or is calling me out supposed to be some subtle way of calling out the behavior in general, and you are addressing me because you actually believe that I am more reasonable. If that's the case, sorry, I didn't pick up on it. The thought only just occurred.
I already said I see emotional frustration and baseless speculation. Then I see over the top attacks on those. For years. Neither is effective and none of it is worthwhile reading.
To me, we collectively took a good subject which has rigor and lessons to be learned ( about the Giants and our own professional lives ) and turned it into a danse macabre.
Asking me to join you in a tactic that isnt working on this subject ( just too much scar tissue for all involved at this point) while claiming I am enabling is the same as asking me to add more wildly waving dance partners in the frying pan.
I already said in my first post the very positive and laudatory reasons I took time to address you. Please take in compliments when they come your way. You are so well armed to see and attack bullies you see them more often then they appear. This is an endless bad circle for several of us...why dont we leave it.
When they asked Senator Aiken for his solution to the quagmire in Vietnam he said " Declare a big victory and get out - as fast as possible"
That applies to a lot of quagmires
When you get a chance please re read from the perspective that these posts were meant to help.
Take care
Quote:
We've made a lot of turnover in our scouting area, we've completely changed our grading system in how we grade college players, we're deeper into analytics and technology than we've ever been before, and that process is ongoing. We've completely re-organized areas in our football operations, we've added a staff psychologist on a full-time basis, and we believe it would be a mistake to pull the plug on that after two years, particularly when you consider that Dave spent a good part of the first year fighting for his life.
Probably the most informative 30 seconds in the last 8 years of Giants football.
I definitely remember Mara saying that.
With all of the uncertainty of the pandemic, and how it has completely upended profession football in so many ways, I would bet a significant amount of money that Mara will essentially say the same thing in January 2021. And use that as a reason to keep Gettleman in his GM chair for at least another year...
Further, I also hear this in Mara's words as well. He likes what Gettleman has done and he doesn't want to risk (or maybe even spend extra money) changing it with someone else from the outside, who would rightfully want to have their own grading system, process, technology approach, etc. So the best way to avoid that is to promote from within. And that clearly means Abrams is the next in line.
So the Gettleman legacy is very likely going to be here for a long, long time...
Yeah, I remember this too, and have a similar take away from it.
I already said I see emotional frustration and baseless speculation. Then I see over the top attacks on those. For years. Neither is effective and none of it is worthwhile reading.
To me, we collectively took a good subject which has rigor and lessons to be learned ( about the Giants and our own professional lives ) and turned it into a danse macabre.
Asking me to join you in a tactic that isnt working on this subject ( just too much scar tissue for all involved at this point) while claiming I am enabling is the same as asking me to add more wildly waving dance partners in the frying pan.
I already said in my first post the very positive and laudatory reasons I took time to address you. Please take in compliments when they come your way. You are so well armed to see and attack bullies you see them more often then they appear. This is an endless bad circle for several of us...why dont we leave it.
When they asked Senator Aiken for his solution to the quagmire in Vietnam he said " Declare a big victory and get out - as fast as possible"
That applies to a lot of quagmires
When you get a chance please re read from the perspective that these posts were meant to help.
Take care
See my post just prior... Our posts crossed...
I rarely address him directly anymore.
Over the years we have had several long lasting repetitive impossible circle jerks on the board. This one is closer to the 25th than the first
Sometimes a circle of ordinarily contributing posters gets stuck on an otherwise good subject and by the time the scar tissue gets hardened into certainty and then the ash heap of exhaustion the subject is a third rail and some posters leave us.
Im not learning anything about analytics from these threads and I know you are not as well. They are now scorecards of people with imperfect memory about what they wrote and how it was perceived but good memory that surely they were right and well intentioned
The OL and D is on its way with more football players overall on the roster. We have better coaching. It is now up to first Jones and secondly Judge to take the next steps imo. Analytics can be a part of the overall best practices but talent, toughness and intelligence will bring the next Lombardi.
You post some good thoughts .mcl on the board. I hope you continue.
And yes...please stay with it McL.
No issue with me there on the Eli mandate. I have always subscribed.
We sort of kicked your Judge thoughts around the other day. The only real way to give Judge that consolidated football power is to trust him with both hats - HC and GM; and keep Abrams as the cap guru/VP of PP. That's essentially the role New England has with Caserio.
My guess is Judge isn't in the same realm as KA with the cap management and KA really isn't the football evaluator that Judge is. So create a new management structure.
Alas, I think that's only a pipe dream. But if it were to happen it would show a real willingness to change.
Abrams is a cap guy. Tannenbaum is basically the only GM archetype there right? If an internal guy got the bump I'd bet on Pettit before Abrams. But assuming Judge is the right coach someone he is familiar with before both.
Reminds me of the old UPS ad campaign on Logistics. Everyone is running around doing different stuff, and the voice is over is “That’s Logistics.”
All of it’s analytics. Even when you don’t call it that.
Analysis isn’t the outcome, it’s one of the steps.
Now in the spirit of being as purely factual as possible here are fairly clear reasons that I will again state to very fairly question the ability of anyone at the top of the Giants organization to understand how to implement and apply analytics effectively.
1) Picking Barkley 2nd and mocking analytics, not displaying an understanding of positional value. You can talk about the systems DG built all you want, and the quality of what he's building in NY and yes, the best systems take time to build. But this isn't something you have to build, this is widely agreed upon math that people believe the data speaks to so obviously it has become common knowledge to a point a reporter asked about it but DG and the Giants still ignored it. And I want to be very clear, this isn't saying RBs are worthless, this is saying #2 is extremely high for them. And as much as people point to Elliot as a comp, the different between 2 and 4 is the #21st pick in the draft. That's a big difference and my opinion of Saquon at 4 would be different, way different if it involved a trade down. You can say don't get too cute, but Nelson, Chubb, Denzel Ward and extra picks would also have been more than fine.
2) DG never trading down. And trading up for Baker, trading valuable draft picks for LW as an impending FA in a lost year. There again is tons of research and any mathematical approach would point to these being bad moves. Especially when your team has as many holes as the Giants you need more draft picks. I'm not going to go looking but I think DG said as much. You look at the team right now and it is clear we needed a lot more bites at the apple.
If you are going to reject conventional wisdom you have to be right. Nothing wrong with having confidence and thinking you know and see things others don't but you need to back that up. Based on them bucking generally agreed upon analytical conclusions of other football researchers either their systems are producing lower quality information / bad conclusions or leaders are getting good information that they are willfully ignoring. Neither are at all what you want.
DG and Ty Siam / Abrams experience both come into play here. If these systems they are all building are quality how come they miss obvious things that other teams seem to understand? Isn't it fair to say in light of the performance without even strong evidence to point to that there are things other teams understand better than the Giants? Siam and Abrams have seemingly been in charge of the Giants operation for 5 years, a really bad 5 years for the team.
That's where DG misusing outlier comes into play for me. DG had two years to sit on and discuss the Barkley pick and before this season he doubled down that he was an outlier. Walking around validating his decision to draft Barkley by calling him an outlier, he is misusing a mathematical term. And if he could sit in reasoning like that it's fair to question how well people could understand how to apply more advanced mathematical concepts than that.
Does anyone know exactly what is going on in the building? No. And unlike Fats I've come forward and apologized for lacking grace in these discussions at times.
But to bring it to relevance today, Fats started to make outlandish claims of me being fraudulent in my career. I sent my resume to the mods to sort it out. He went way too far. We were asked to stay away from each other. I complied. He has not stopped trying to bait me for one day. He follows me around, jabs at almost every one of my posts. I like McL ignored him for a while because I was asked to do that and will go back to doing so. But it honestly feels like all the board policing doesn't apply to him. It would be nice if someone could actually get him to stop constantly trying to bait me. All this talk of the board policing itself but him just trying to bait people just gets tolerated on an ongoing basis. I can only be poked so many times.
Fats came onto this thread looking for a fight. Cherry picking the one team with a one losing record from the top 8 to try to play down the value of advanced analytics. You bill have also played down the value. But as I said earlier in the thread 5/6 superbowl contenders the last 3 years are higher on that list. Those teams are 70 games over .500 or league average in the last two years. Perhaps they are more valuable than a lot of people give them credit for?
Surveys aren't perfect but they are information. Those in analytics tend to really care about data sets and information accuracy so not only should surveys not be disregarded, this pool, who deals in data would probably take it more seriously. It's a small sample no doubt but does that mean it's worthless? Absolutely not.
Also linking the original thread and echo McL. My goal is to always be helpful, insightful, kind. I'm coming at this with frustration, I'll concede that. But I just want the Giants to be better and at the end of the day I think that gets lost sometimes. I wouldn't have said word 1 about any of this if the Giants didn't look so lost on some of this stuff. Fats often comes into these arguments in incredibly bad faith and honestly I was completely taken aback when he came at me like that. Most of the time if I start talking about the work I've done I get the opposite response I got from him, which was more disrespect and vitriol, I'll admit to being ill prepared for that and knocked off kilter. But anyone that reads the original thread I posted below my overarching points are very clear. There was mounting evidence that the Giants weren't committing to innovation and modernizing like other teams and I was concerned.
English Alaister who seems to love to point out how complex the game is and I'd agree with that. But more and more complex systems have seen advanced analytics add value as the years pass. These problems are all solved by employing people with much higher technical capabilities than the Giants seem to have in the building. You can't have it both ways, either acknowledge the complexity and hire a CTO, make a real commitment, or just pretend you can plod your way to a solution with lesser talent, you can't have both. People say EA has ties to the team as well. This quote was from 2018.
I'm personally tired of people propping up the competence of people in the Giants organization. Let's see them gather a competent NFL roster and we can have a whole thread about how great everyone is. BTW for all the talk of me overstating things, I'd just like to leave how I entered the thread before I started getting attacked
NoGainDayne : 10/1/2018 3:20 pm : link
and even more pissed off now. While other teams are moving their analytics and technology programs forward we hired a guy stuck in the past who barely changed the staff.
We haven't done anything to show we can compete in a fast modernizing NFL.
I started to root against the Giants winning last year because I wanted them to clean house. I might be there again already. This team isn't going to the playoffs and I fear the only way ownership might actually accept the reality that they need a new leader is one or two years more of horrible play.
Honestly I might be willing to stomach that if we can actually get a lick of innovation in the building.
I hit the nail on the head right there honestly and in no way shape or form did I deserve to get talked to the way I ended up getting talked to. It seems like when anyone is defending the Giants they can be as big of an asshole as they want but anyone bringing critiques are expected to act in the highest honor and decorum. That's difficult when you go to as many games as I do, spend time, money, wait in line for that train in the crowds to go home and watch them put a truly pathetic product on the field. Then come to the board and in your own way try to do something about that problem and have some unhinged asshole constantly trying to bait you into fights and play dirty. And again, I'm the ONLY one that has made public apologies for my behavior, and you bill sit here and tell us that it's us that don't want our points challenged? No, I just don't like to be berated, insulted, followed around when the last thing I'm coming here to do is interact with him. It would be nice if you bill could at least get him to step up and apologize for his behavior. I'm guessing he has 20-30 years on me but he gets treated with these kid gloves.
Original Thread of Fats Never-Ending Vendetta Against Me - ( New Window )
I keep hearing it from the RB standpoint. The game takes time to develop players to what the NFL is looking for. This group of running backs currently are as talented as any since running the football was the priority. So any past numbers are moot because to compare these RBs before 2017 or so it’s night and day. These guys are absolute weapons out in space and can catch the ball. Even someone like Derrick Henry can catch now. Where as if he played 10 years ago he’d still have hands of stone
The OL and D is on its way with more football players overall on the roster. We have better coaching. It is now up to first Jones and secondly Judge to take the next steps imo. Analytics can be a part of the overall best practices but talent, toughness and intelligence will bring the next Lombardi.
You post some good thoughts .mcl on the board. I hope you continue.
This is such a fantastic post. It’s a point I’ve tried to articulate as well. The prior two head coaches who were hired (McAdoo & Shurmur) were both hired in hopes of reinvigorating Eli’s career. From all reports, Eli & Beckham pushed for McAdoo after Coughlin “retired”. Shurmur wasn’t an inspiring choice, but Mara seeing what he did with Minnesota and Keenum, likely gave him hope he could do the same with NYG. Remember, they were a season separated from 11-5 at that point.
All of that failed miserably, no excuses. But, the rebuild started legitimately once Daniel Jones was drafted. Eli started the first two weeks, and then the keys got handed to Daniel Jones.
Mara hires a program builder who is only 38 to align with a young, impressionable team. Gettleman drafts the hopeful OLT of the future to pair with the hopeful future QB.
At this point, starting all over doesn’t make sense. That would be premature. Need to see more from Jones and see how these young players develop.
Based on above, the new GM should have a common philosophy with Judge. I’m sure Mara hopes for that to be Abrams. He’s been involved in the interviews and took on a greater media responsibility this past offseason.
I keep hearing it from the RB standpoint. The game takes time to develop players to what the NFL is looking for. This group of running backs currently are as talented as any since running the football was the priority. So any past numbers are moot because to compare these RBs before 2017 or so it’s night and day. These guys are absolute weapons out in space and can catch the ball. Even someone like Derrick Henry can catch now. Where as if he played 10 years ago he’d still have hands of stone
See the article below, I'd say Analytics are a huge part in what the Ravens do and it looks like it's working...
The Baltimore Ravens Fell Short of the Super Bowl, but Their NFL Analytics Revolution Is Just Beginning - ( New Window )
But it’s totally all the analytics. Remember this is a front office and coaching staff that won Superbowls with Flacco and Dilfer as QB.
Seems like analytics are being leveraged to gain an advantage, which can't be underrated.
Also, don't you think part of them picking Lamar Jackson was a plan to use him in line with this strategy?
What about the 49ers quickly modernizing and using team construction analytics to shape their roster? They made a huge commitment and completely changed the direction of their team.
Most importantly you are nit picking and separating, when teams make a big commitment to is you can't say well they just pick talent well and that's the important thing. It's inextricably linked to that process. And teams with large commitments overall seem to be doing very well.
Seems like analytics are being leveraged to gain an advantage, which can't be underrated.
Also, don't you think part of them picking Lamar Jackson was a plan to use him in line with this strategy?
What about the 49ers quickly modernizing and using team construction analytics to shape their roster? They made a huge commitment and completely changed the direction of their team.
Most importantly you are nit picking and separating, when teams make a big commitment to is you can't say well they just pick talent well and that's the important thing. It's inextricably linked to that process. And teams with large commitments overall seem to be doing very well.
I absolutely do think that picking Lamar Jackson was part of this strategy. It's why they jumped into the first to grab him. I actually don't think you see them give him a giant long term second contract. I think they run him into the ground and franchise tag him twice. Unless he someone manages to stay healthy, then you might see a deal.
Picking talent well is the important thing. Using analytics to help with strategy or ingame decision making is one thing, but picking talent and coaching are far and away the two most important things.
But it’s totally all the analytics. Remember this is a front office and coaching staff that won Superbowls with Flacco and Dilfer as QB.
There’s a school of thought that better data analysis leads to better scouting, value-based roster building, and finding passed over gems like Lamar Jackson.
How can you not say it's a big part of their success?
This is why we as fans should have hope. I get why people are pessimistic, but the Giants went out of their comfort zone and grabbed who they thought was the most impressive program builder, even though he was only a special teams coach. Jints Central those old fogies!
If you don't come away impressed with Judge as a guy that gets it, don't know what to tell you. And that's why all this talk about DG is silly at the end of the day. This is going to be Judge's show and it's been obvious since day 1 with the moves he's made. You are also going to see a very long leash, and I'm sure there will be people calling for his firing after 5 wins this year which would be the biggest mistake.
How can you not say it's a big part of their success?
Theyve had massive success BEFORE the analytics. It's the people making the decisions, not the data. I'm sure they use it to help in their decision making process, but who isn't at this point. That's why it's an asinine argument.
And it's even more asinine when you consider the fact they haven't even made a Superbowl yet. Although it's hard to believe this won't be the year. But what if Lamar gets hurt? I mean he's not a pocket passer and we all know what the "analytics" says happens to running QBs. Is that a failure of the analytics?
That's not to throw cold water on them - they and Steelers by and large have been excellent drafting teams for the last 2.5 decades (when the closest thing to "analytics" as described in this thread was Buschbaum's draft guide). Those 2 orgs are probably the 2 best off the top of my head, even ahead of the Pats. Ogden, Lewis, Reed, Ngata, Lamar, Stanley, Yanda. Ben, AB, Shazier, Polamalu, Watt, Bell, Decastro, Faneca etc. Multiple guys with legitimate OPOY & DPOY/HOF resumes. Compare that to this org (and most others) and we've basically got what Eli and Snee? Maybe Tiki/Osi?
they also each hit it out of the park with their current head coaches which has allowed them tremendous stability (though each of those fanbases had frustrations along the way, even Harbough was on the hot seat a few years ago).
Through 3 different GM regimes we haven't been as good in either area, though we've been better in both areas than probably 2/3's of the league (which is why Coughlin won 2 SB's and Fassel went to 1). No need to overcomplicate with buzzwords and overly wrought narratives - those 2 exceptionally smart organizations have continued to behave smartly as technology and information has taken leaps forward. Correlation and causation be damned.
Lines of Scrimmage's post is on target and tidy. In year 3 the OL and defense look to be going in the right direction. I have been a fan of Jones since the days he was worse than Ryan Finley and I like what I've seen from Judge. I'm less concerned with processes we know little about than I am the decisions they've actually made, a good number of which look a lot smarter than the hot takes at the time they were made (Darnold, OBJ, Jones, etc).
You and or you and McL went to the mods? ( dont want an answer)
They advised you to solve the problem by not engaging on this subject? ( dont really want an answer)
So you do that and it works
Then you dont. And it doesnt work. for the 99th time.
Who's zooming who?
How important to you is it to solve this problem? Do you really want to solve it or keep trying to gain an un-achievable emotional victory? Which draws you? The drama or the subject? I can only say by observation it feels like the former. Im sure you think its the later. Us outsiders deserve accurate fact based discussion or the right to disagree with what is just a speculative opinion. Are we as free as you are to point that out?
It doesnt matter how it started or who is more right about a thin slice of unknowable salami. Now its a merry go round of unresolvable injured feelings while you and McL have good lives to live.
Which takes the analytically sound application of time and energy.
BTW, I think EA's point was not about "complexity" as in lots of variables ( easy to solve as you said) as much as complexity driven by wide wide confidence levels that leave decision makers un convinced of their applicability ( for example, in a specific 22 player game situation on a wet field at 32 degrees when the carpet is badly worn and its mid way into the 3rd Q) when sample sizes of input variables are not the same.
Imo, good science but bad applications. are their good applications for data driven facts and probabilities? Of course.
You and I disagree on the degree talent prediction models lend themselves to greater assessments as compared to in person exposure with sharp questioning and listening...but those are opinions we can and have to hold without diminishing the opinion of the other - for both positions are unprovable.
imo.
Take Care NGD
I don't doubt that was your preference and I do recall some who felt that way. But nobody in the league felt that way, including the Ravens. All of the professionals missed that evaluation in one way or another so it's a weird example to use to hold up as an example of next level genius.
I watch a lot of ACC (and CFB in general) and my assessment of all the QB's that year was that they all had significant pros and cons. And QB is the hardest position to arm chair from the sidelines because so much is between the ears. None were no-brainers but all of them had enough talent to make people who passed on them look stupid. Most arm chair QB's seemed to take the field which is a luxury untethered to reality.
I'd also throw a little cold water on the notion that Lamar Jackson is Pat Mahomes or Russell Wilson. In fantasy football yes, in the NFL playoffs not yet.
And you were 100% right on that-so far
( I think its somewhat unfair to use injury risk as a reason to not take a chance on greatness. After all, every NFL player who can get badly injured. In other words, all of them).
Rodgers, Tarkington, Wilson, Staubach, Elway, McNair, Cunningham and Young all could run and did - yet had long and winning NFL careers. So there are more than enough examples of success to offset the failures of running QB
And you were 100% right on that-so far
( I think its somewhat unfair to use injury risk as a reason to not take a chance on greatness. After all, every NFL player who can get badly injured. In other words, all of them).
Rodgers, Tarkington, Wilson, Staubach, Elway, McNair, Cunningham and Young all could run and did - yet had long and winning NFL careers. So there are more than enough examples of success to offset the failures of running QB
jmo but I think he fell for 2 reasons:
1) recency bias because he gave GM's flashbacks to RG3. Same build, same insane CFB production, except Lamar was more of a runner which probably made it feel like a greater injury risk
2) it was a heavy QB draft someone was going to fall.
I still don't think the RG3 comp was totally incorrect btw, RG3 was Lamar until he tore his knee up. He made a pro bowl and led the Skins to a 9-6 record as a rookie completing 65% of his passes. Injury is a real risk for any player attempting 150+ rushes more than other players at the position. Lamar ended up the ultimate lotto ticket but I can understand why there weren't any GM's willing to stake their careers on it.
I recall the mom possibly getting involved in contract talks was a turn-off...? No?
jmo but I think he fell for 2 reasons:
1) recency bias because he gave GM's flashbacks to RG3. Same build, same insane CFB production, except Lamar was more of a runner which probably made it feel like a greater injury risk
2) it was a heavy QB draft someone was going to fall.
I still don't think the RG3 comp was totally incorrect btw, RG3 was Lamar until he tore his knee up. He made a pro bowl and led the Skins to a 9-6 record as a rookie completing 65% of his passes. Injury is a real risk for any player attempting 150+ rushes more than other players at the position. Lamar ended up the ultimate lotto ticket but I can understand why there weren't any GM's willing to stake their careers on it.
LJax, and let's be honest here, fell into the right situation with the Ravens. Talk about serendipity...
The guy who build the 9ers offense around Kaepernick, Greg Roman, just happened to be the OC in Baltimore. And to their everlasting credit, particularly Harbaugh, they went all in and built a team and structure completely around LJax.
And you were 100% right on that-so far
Like I just said to Eric, there was a real crisscrossing of good fortune with LJax ending up in Baltimore.
Outside of New England and their mad scientist, BB, I really know if LJax would actually work as well anywhere else...(maybe KC)...
Quote:
I said so here in the months leading up to that draft. Jackson was a better runner in college than Barkley was, and he has been in the NFL as well. And he's a better passer than Jones was in college, and is again in the NFL. Jackson was CLEARLY the best player in college football. It was a bias against running quarterbacks that caused him to drop in the draft. I think that wall has been broken down.
I recall the mom possibly getting involved in contract talks was a turn-off...? No?
you are correct - he'd also refused to do anything at the combine other than passing drills and did poorly on the wonderlic. That's what makes it hard put yourself in the GM's shoes who had access to talk to him throughout that process - maybe it was much about nothing, maybe he didn't come off well.
Even the Ravens - it's not like they fell in love with the guy and did what Andy Reid did to get Mahomes. They drafted a mediocre TE ahead of him and then traded up for him after the fact giving with their 2nd and the next year's 2nd. He was drafted as a lotto ticket more than franchise QB.
Lamar Jackson, His Mother, and the Plan They’ve Always Had - ( New Window )
This may be a strange point but I think there's a case to be made that what Watson has done is more impressive given the situation he's been in and his injury. His slide was the most inexplicable to me. How anyone watched him battle Bama and passed on him makes no sense.
Quote:
I said so here in the months leading up to that draft. Jackson was a better runner in college than Barkley was, and he has been in the NFL as well. And he's a better passer than Jones was in college, and is again in the NFL. Jackson was CLEARLY the best player in college football. It was a bias against running quarterbacks that caused him to drop in the draft. I think that wall has been broken down.
I recall the mom possibly getting involved in contract talks was a turn-off...? No?
That was my one hangup, and it's the sort of thing the teams could sort out in interviews. Once that was cleared as a non-issue, picking anyone in that draft over Jackson didn't make sense.
And yeah he hasn't won a playoff game, but that's coming. If we're judging him on that, how do we judge Bailey and Jones?
Whatever. Mara/Gettleman bungled that off-season like they've bungled everything else. And now the team is a joke.
This may be a strange point but I think there's a case to be made that what Watson has done is more impressive given the situation he's been in and his injury. His slide was the most inexplicable to me. How anyone watched him battle Bama and passed on him makes no sense.
That is such a good point about Watson. He was THE STEAL of the 2017 draft. His resume at Clemson was sensational, especially in big games. To think, the Bears traded up for Trubisky...
Further, it is absolutely true he has done much more with less in Houston. Some very shaky OLs, tons of injuries to his offensive weapons, and questionable coaching.
Some of his comebacks have been epic...
In hindsight, you are absolutely right - he would look a lot better in blue than Barkley and Jones.
Assuming, of course, the brass had the foresight to see the immense upside...
He kept poking me continuously even when I ignored him and I got sick of it again. Like McL I don't go around looking for fights but if ignoring isn't working, I'll hit back and not back down. Especially him coming to this thread just to be combative and make what was a pretty dumb comment when he is supposedly this righteous fighter of the stupid.
I said complexity even if EA did not. The softer sciences, the chemistry of a team, there are ways to integrate these variables into already strong models to learn more about even how you examine those variables yourself. I don't think talent prediction models lend themselves better to forecasting outcomes. Beyond more tangible things I talk about the importance of someone's energy all the time. But strong, advanced numerical analysis buttressing a qualitative analysis is by far the best. And I think the Giants very clearly thought themselves smarter than conventional analytical wisdom, which IMO is dangerous thinking that should have been well beyond an organization in 2018.
The feedback loop between predictions and decisions is vital, the human interacting with the advanced technology, comparing conclusions, both systems improve from each other. It seems like the coaches are really buying into this from what you've told us, which is great. What scares me is the Giants seem to continually be contrite and apologetic in public and then confident privately. It’s been said to me directly by someone in the Giants inner circle that people that don’t believe in DG to lead us forward even after all this are “idiots.” I don't understand the continued overconfidence in their own people. There is a disconnect and a scary one at that for the future of our team. I'm left with these questions.
1. Do think they are genuinely interested in bringing in a GM from outside the Giants family if this period of futility continues?
2. How much can you really expect someone that mocked analytics and publicly misuses mathematical terminology to usher in comprehensive integration of new technology in team construction decisions?
3. At what point do you say that maybe part of the problem of not being able to leverage analytics as well as the top teams has to do with the technical qualifications and experience of the person leading the operation?
Definitely not their prototype.
Keep this name in mind for this upcoming draft - Trey Lance, QB, North Dakota State. Not quite as dynamic as LJax, but there are some interesting skills...
I'm in no way disputing that you (Go Terps) wanted Jackson, just that it wasn't the no brainer it now is with the benefit of hindsight. As most things aren't. Especially when it comes to QBs in the draft.
Quote:
Not their style.
Definitely not their prototype.
Keep this name in mind for this upcoming draft - Trey Lance, QB, North Dakota State. Not quite as dynamic as LJax, but there are some interesting skills...
Way ahead of you. Looks very interesting. The way things look now with Jones, I'm ready to look elsewhere. His problems aren't the type that get better.
I was interested, too, but more in round two.
There wasn't a team in the NFL who treated him like a franchise QB including the team that drafted him.
You build through the lines, I mean everyone says this all the time, DG said it. I'm not sure the Giants should have taken LJax at 2. Although perhaps him and OBJ together changes the direction of OBJ's career. But no one can honestly say what he would looks like without people ready to scheme around his talents, with a bad offensive line, etc. Much safer team construction and long term win probability boosting to be 100% sure you have the lines right first.
Terps was 100% right about him and I can also confirm he was all over it, like I'd say pretty early in the college season before the draft if I'm remembering the timing correctly.
IMO coach, GM, whatever, some don't understand how to leverage these players hence the divergent value system. (Many teams probably scoffed at Murray being taken too)
And I think Kliff Kingsbury took the job specifically to work with Murray.
You could say coaches should be able to properly use these players but i'd say the fact that they fall is probably an indication that they can't.
I know nothing of the side swirl with the mods. All I know is that its another sign the subject is kind of toxic due to the accumulation of past scars. So maybe the mods proposal could work if all actually followed it. No one likes to see posters jammed up. I know when I first came here if I said something without a basis FMIC was only one ( and a mild one at that) of a pretty hard boiled crew trying to drive out commentary without knowledge.
As for right now...what we know is actually less than we used to know about the Giants and analytics.
Too too much speculation. We know Judge and Graham are very active and demanding analytic hounds and we know much greater efforts are being made. We know Judge schedules an hour each day ( six days a week and the time allotted goes up during the season) just on the subject of improving the integration of analytics into the different processes. How long it takes, who internally and externally is involved is unknown that I know of. But watch Judges post game 3 play breakdowns....think that can be done with out rigorous data driven play analysis and pre game preparation?
Think the by and large ( not all) sensible contract structures we saw off season happens without someone re-examining prior assumptions the organization made about ways to maximize talent acquisition optionality and the cap?
Lots of signs of greater organizational QC if you look for them
Meanwhile, I have never known analytics to make a big difference until an organizations daily front line execution level, front line talent pool and front line ( Competitive market facing jobs) development processes are roughly competitive to the competition.
imo, then it can be an additional lift off from there ( so can an infusion of cash or better cap/debt management) so its a thing they should be working hard to upgrade so its there when we get better, but to me, does not explain the past few years of track record.
This was always going to be a year when any upwards signs are hard to find. It takes most teams five years to recover from the loss of a franchise QB. Lets say Eli started to slip long enough ago that replacement optionality was GM Job 1. If that was done even two obvious years ago then we could have a shot at a seamless transition by this year or next year.
That and cap management going into a transition period was Job 2. Draft is always Job 3. If we got even those two of those jobs right and well timed we'd be better off even if we couldn't spell data.
imo
"Lets say Eli started to slip long enough ago that replacement optionality was GM Job 1. If that was done even two obvious years ago then we could have a shot at a seamless transition by this year or next year."
Anyone who has watched the NFL knows that except for celebrated statistical outliers, Qbs of 34 start to drop off and many quite quickly after 36.
So in 2017, Eli hits the normal window of decline. You want at least 2 years of experience before that. You want 1-2 years drafting a sure number 2 thats able to be a mid range Qb until you find a franchise player if not hope your draftee is the next franchise Qb.
The other way of doing it is to have the cap room to overpay one of the top 5 back up Qbs
Having a qb controversy would have been preferable to watching the slow decline of a guy with no plan in place.
You also want max flexibility of cap as you enter the qb decline window.
The only prep Mara and Reese and Ross did was try to have a new OL in place in front of the decline and during it. In that chore, there were many talent failures, coaching development misses and asshole (or four) draftees.
But they also did not go into full aggressive mode in 2011 when it was obvious the old OL had to be replaced from left to right.
Mistakes and luck all are part of the mix you cannot do much about but not moving at franchise window speed for several years was pretending time and declines don't exist.
Ostrich behavior
If Romo hits Austin in Dallas for that TD, there is a good chance that Coughlin is gone after that season. Incredibly, the Giants got hot and squeezed out another title out of the core.
The real problem came after 2012 though. The Giants started 6-2 that year, but that record included barely getting by Tampa Bay, a late TD by Cruz to get by WSH & surviving by a finger tip against Dallas.
The Giants got smoked by Cincy, Atlanta & Baltimore in the 2nd half of 2012 and went 3-5. The team was toast.
So, the fork in the road happens after the 2012 season and instead of entering a full rebuild, the Giants went all in with trying to win a Super Bowl on their own turf at MetLife. Remember, the Super Bowl clock in 2013?
Then you get a bunch of half measures:
-Replace Gilbride with McAdoo (2014)
-Replace Fewell with Spags (2015)
-Replace Coughlin with McAdoo (2016) *keep most of Coughlin’s staff
-Replace McAdoo & Reese with Shurmur & Gettleman (2018 - draft Saquon; keep Eli)
-Retain Eli in 2019
Everything above was shuffling around the deck chairs to try to win with Eli. None of that above was a rebuild, not even close. The first bold decision by this organization in recent years has been hiring a 38 year old Joe Judge. Not predictable, outside the box & a bold decision for once.
They have a young team with a young coach who seems to be a program builder. My hope is with Judge & I don’t buy the fact that it’s impossible to win with Mara, this is the first time they’ve truly committed to the rebuild.
They even had time to reconsider their approach h to a franchise qb replacement past the time it was evident...and did not
NoGainDayne : 9/25/2020 9:45 pm : link : reply
fats and I were asked to steer clear of each other and I was the only one who respected that.
I was not asked to "steer clear" of anyone. You apparently went to the mods with a resume and you demanded that I stop questioning your qualifications. And as ridiculous as doing that was(as well as showing off the continued need you have to prove that you have competence), I was not told to stop interacting with you - only to not question your qualifications. Nothing about challenging shitty takes.
The other thing is I wasn't even addressing you on my initial post on this thread. I quoted and responded to jsuds about Coughlin using GPS. Then I agreed with the interesting observation that the analytic guys were taking a very non-analytic survey and applying it as if it were fact. Meanwhile, you responded to my comment to jsuds with aa comment to me "Idiot, I know facts and math aren't your strong suit"
So save us the revisionist history here. You should worry more about the fact that a grown man sent his resume to the mods.
I'm actually ok with that. But by 2015, Eli was in decline and they had no choice but to keep plugging in players.
Eli was not getting cut or released. That was never gonna happen.
But as with everything in the Reese/Ross era their evaluations and decisions sucked. Let me summarize with 3 simple examples from that offseason:
Brandon Marshall over Andrew Whitworth (who has publicly said he wanted to come here) as the "final piece".
Evan Engram over TJ Watt, Cam Robinson, Tredavious White, or Ryan Ramcyk or trading up for a QB (McAdoo was supposedly in love with Mahomes - who would have allowed them to continue to play Eli anyway since he was widely viewed as developmental).
Davis Webb rated high enough that they thought he could be a QB of the future.
The flawed processes that led to the flawed decisions like those from the 2012 draft - 2017 are the #1 reason why this franchise went off the road.
And the 2018-2020 drafts have been a positive course correction.
Quote:
Got one thing wrong bill
NoGainDayne : 9/25/2020 9:45 pm : link : reply
fats and I were asked to steer clear of each other and I was the only one who respected that.
I was not asked to "steer clear" of anyone. You apparently went to the mods with a resume and you demanded that I stop questioning your qualifications. And as ridiculous as doing that was(as well as showing off the continued need you have to prove that you have competence), I was not told to stop interacting with you - only to not question your qualifications. Nothing about challenging shitty takes.
The other thing is I wasn't even addressing you on my initial post on this thread. I quoted and responded to jsuds about Coughlin using GPS. Then I agreed with the interesting observation that the analytic guys were taking a very non-analytic survey and applying it as if it were fact. Meanwhile, you responded to my comment to jsuds with aa comment to me "Idiot, I know facts and math aren't your strong suit"
So save us the revisionist history here. You should worry more about the fact that a grown man sent his resume to the mods.
Wait, he actually went crying to the mods? Really? That’s quite childish, imo..Lawd.
That would really require a “Lord”.
That would really require a “Lord”.
No, sorry..You don’t go to a mod, unless someone’s used your real full name on the site when there’s a disagreement
It was clearly Mara. He’s basically called Eli his other son. And with the two improbable SBs trophies Eli helped put behind the glass display at Jints Central, Mara kept trying to go to the well one more time hoping they could stitch together enough of a team to produce Eli magic.
While that’s certainly an understandable desire, it made decision making more emotional than logical. They simply held on to Eli at least three years too long. When they should have cut bait in 2015 and called Caterpillar to get the heavy equipment to rebuild.
Instead, they kept chasing, dug a deeper hole, and got nothing out of it.
That was my major problem with the Gettleman hire. He was so desperate for the job he was willing to appease Mara by agreeing to the Eli Reclamation Project.
I’ve never liked Gettleman but he’s not stupid. So I refuse to believe he watched all of this Eli video from 2017 and concluded Eli still had gas in the tank. NFW. Which means his enabling has put us deeper in this ditch...
And if missed on Jones, we’ve lost another five years. At least.
Mara might have thought Reese was more of the problem not the wobbly direction of the franchise?
I find the issue since 2012 has been the OL.that and we are still trying Eli may have declined but I bet if they had a good OL the results for both of them would be far different. Maybe the days of San Francisco NFCCG Eli were gone but something tells me he would have found a way to win a couple more big games.
Expecting a older QB to do more was the mistake imo. I do think TC contributed to the OL woes with too much loyalty to that 2005-11 core of players. Someone like BB would have cut bait on the older lineman who had been in decline.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
Mara panicked on McAdoo because he was a highly sought after offensive coordinator and the offense was coming off a good year. Then they decided to hire Shurmur in order to fix the offense with one last shot with Eli. There is an argument here that this is when we should have blown everything up. Bringing in a HC just to placate to your QB that may have a little left in the tank is a risky proposition and its clear that feelings got in the way of sound decision making here.
The way our orginization is structure we will always need a strong program bulder type and that's why I'm happy that all this nonsense seems to be in the rearview. The guys we were all looking at the HC job specialized in that.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
👍
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
This might be a wild assertion, but if you swapped Eli and Ben right now and put Eli on that Steeler team I think they'd be just as much of a contender.
That doesn't excuse the way things were handled here across the board, the reality was that the team around him was far from that even in the mirage of 2016.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
Ugh. If you need a fortress and such better weapons that he most likely can’t be your guy any more either. Can’t have it both ways.
They only prepared for a hopa-hopa outcome in a situation that is usually very trying for a franchise.
I also point out that Eli's durability is odds defying not franchise anchoring as age increases
They only prepared for a hopa-hopa outcome in a situation that is usually very trying for a franchise.
I also point out that Eli's durability is odds defying not franchise anchoring as age increases
That's certainly fair.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
It’s been the conventional wisdom for at least the last eight years that the college ranks just isn’t producing OLs that fit the more traditional game of a dropback QB. So thinking we could find enough OLs to suit Eli’s needs was a complete misunderstanding of the market. Which I think was another problem with the front office...
The league has/had shifted to mobile. QBs who could compensate with their legs with inadequate pass protection. So unless you had Tom Brady, and the genius of Scarnecchia and Belichick, total outliers, we simply weren’t going to find what Eli needed.
And if you want to talk the free agency market, the spend needed to solve the problem completely would have been a cap crusher...
Then that’s even worse...
I don't agree with that thinking since you are using the term "undoubtedly". I consider it an unknown. I also understand evidence could point us to the conclusion you pointed out, but I don't find it to be without doubt.
I think they may have felt he was in steep decline after firing Ben M. However, Mara/Tisch were roasted for the benching. Most of the writers, analysts etc. were blasting the Giants about how bad the team was around him. Former players were outraged. Mara even told Francessa he did not expect reaction to be so strong. I think that is when the mandate was decided (Eli finishing his contract). Let's give him PS, sign Solder, get another weapon (Barkley) and see if we can put a little better team for him. No way were they cutting him imo.
I agree with you Eric from Li about swapping QB's.
BW, it may be challenging finding lineman but I think what hurts is the CBA and the fact the Giants waited too long on the really good line they had. Snee, Mac, Sueb, Diehl all seemed to decline badly at the same time and then Beatty's injury did not help.
All decisions are made on information. Better information is better than bad or no information. Analyzing the difference, is ... the difference.
In a game where 1) health is typically the biggest determinant of success 2) the average margin of victory is less than one score 3) the difference of 1 net yard per play is an accurate indicator of being above or below .500 on the year — all the little things are big things.
Analysis in football won’t produce a binder like baseball. That’s OK, makes for a better game. No binders will be produced in the execution of the analysis, but the analysis is somewhere between very and critically important.
It’s a shame so many discussions on the topic digress into diatribes, histrionics, and worst among all outcomes the digital hall monitor act which is the lowest form of contribution to this community and a sham that shouldn’t be encouraged or revered.
As far as Manning, it was always simple. Did management feel in January of 2018 Manning could win a championship? That answers all questions around the qualifications of the principals involved.
Quote:
If their decision was that Eli wasn't in steep decline, but only severely affected by surrounding cast (which is a fair point). Well, if it is both, then the team won't make qb shopping the priority it should be.
I think they may have felt he was in steep decline after firing Ben M. However, Mara/Tisch were roasted for the benching. Most of the writers, analysts etc. were blasting the Giants about how bad the team was around him. Former players were outraged. Mara even told Francessa he did not expect reaction to be so strong. I think that is when the mandate was decided (Eli finishing his contract). Let's give him PS, sign Solder, get another weapon (Barkley) and see if we can put a little better team for him. No way were they cutting him imo.
I think the thing that is consistently missed is the possibility of fans and former players being outraged how Eli was benched, not necessarily that he was benched.
Quote:
is undoubtedly DG would have signed a shitty expensive free agent QB to replace him.
I don't agree with that thinking since you are using the term "undoubtedly". I consider it an unknown. I also understand evidence could point us to the conclusion you pointed out, but I don't find it to be without doubt.
Thanks for the post
Quote:
to keep going. But he underestimated how much better a QB needed to be to win on this team. In the end, I agree he told Mara what he wanted to hear but I feel he got there on his own accord.
Then that’s even worse...
Ya’ think?
Quote:
In comment 14984543 LBH15 said:
Quote:
is undoubtedly DG would have signed a shitty expensive free agent QB to replace him.
I don't agree with that thinking since you are using the term "undoubtedly". I consider it an unknown. I also understand evidence could point us to the conclusion you pointed out, but I don't find it to be without doubt.
Thanks for the post
Considering your personality on here, I take that post as sarcasm.
Quote:
get a fair eval on Eli because the offensive line was so bad and the supporting weapons around him were terrible. It really wasn't clear that Eli was done until the first year DG was here. His feet looked like he was in cement. Can't play QB like that unless you have a fortress in front of you.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
Ugh. If you need a fortress and such better weapons that he most likely can’t be your guy any more either. Can’t have it both ways.
If you gave him a fortress he would have produced at a high level with garbage skill talent. Eli makes the run game and wrs look better than they are because of his ability to get into the right plays routes and protections. The point is that the offense was so bad as a whole, it was almost impossible to get a fair eval. The issue goes back to the front office and with their awful team building philosophy around their franchise QB.
Quote:
In comment 14984518 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
get a fair eval on Eli because the offensive line was so bad and the supporting weapons around him were terrible. It really wasn't clear that Eli was done until the first year DG was here. His feet looked like he was in cement. Can't play QB like that unless you have a fortress in front of you.
Eli does so much that doesn't show up on the score sheet so it's understandable why you'd want to stick with that guy until he shows you he can't physically play anymore. Things change on the fly in the NFL. We course corrected fairly fast after that much was clear. Literally went full rebuilding mode in the middle of that season.
Ugh. If you need a fortress and such better weapons that he most likely can’t be your guy any more either. Can’t have it both ways.
If you gave him a fortress he would have produced at a high level with garbage skill talent. Eli makes the run game and wrs look better than they are because of his ability to get into the right plays routes and protections. The point is that the offense was so bad as a whole, it was almost impossible to get a fair eval. The issue goes back to the front office and with their awful team building philosophy around their franchise QB.
Zeke- He did make things look better. But that time had passed before 2018. No further evaluation was needed as was the case.
Barely enough as it turns out
Quote:
Enough to make a sarcastic post
Barely enough as it turns out
When you were banned as Jimmy Googs, did you ask to comeback with your previous handle or was that your third strike? It's certainly awkward how you pretend you are some new poster.
He continually talks about posters having a bad look. He's even talking about what is a worthwhile exchange on this thread and up further above talking about "class"
Why is a previously banned poster giving advice to ANYONE on what to post, how to post, class or what is a worthwhile exchange?
A poster who trolled until he was banned came back to - you guessed it - troll.
Do it quickly before you get banned again and come back with another handle
If that's not a troll what would the word be?? Perhaps cuntery?
This thread is a perfect example of guys calling you out and acting as a child.
Yes, three things people have to deal with yet despise.
What about you, you bastid? :)
This thread is a perfect example of guys calling you out and acting as a child.
It's funny how that works. I get called out as classless while those going after me are just punching a bully in the nose.
Who are the children here?
The guy who is so set on trolling a board that he comes back after being banned under a different handle?
The guy who emails the mods his resume and threatens slander because someone posts that he's full of shit?
If I'm a child, I've had a lot of people playing in the sand with me. Of course it gets distracting when they start crying, but that's what some children do.
The constant GM bashing is a dead thread. The constant blaming of Reese when there is so much evidence that points to a committee decision in drafting and and owner is more involved than most thought.
I hope that Judge breaks the mold. My instincts say no. Imo, this year shouldn't even count.
The constant GM bashing is a dead thread. The constant blaming of Reese when there is so much evidence that points to a committee decision in drafting and and owner is more involved than most thought.
I hope that Judge breaks the mold. My instincts say no. Imo, this year shouldn't even count.
The Giants have had 3 years in a row that "don't count".
No more moral victories. It's time to start winning games. The last two MVPs have been second year quarterbacks. We have a second year quarterback We've picked top 6 three years in a row. We've had five first round picks in three years. We picked a player who supposedly was the best prospect since Peyton Manning. We've twice enjoyed off-seasons with immense cap space.
It's ok to start expecting victories. Enough is enough.
Quote:
at someone’s educational or career background on a football fan site. If that’s what happened.
That would really require a “Lord”.
No, sorry..You don’t go to a mod, unless someone’s used your real full name on the site when there’s a disagreement
Just curious BB56. How about if somebody physically threatens you, but gets your identity wrong?
Quote:
In comment 14984506 LBH15 said:
Quote:
at someone’s educational or career background on a football fan site. If that’s what happened.
That would really require a “Lord”.
No, sorry..You don’t go to a mod, unless someone’s used your real full name on the site when there’s a disagreement
Just curious BB56. How about if somebody physically threatens you, but gets your identity wrong?
To be clear, it's a hypothetical, I am not saying that Fats did such a thing. Just curious where the line is drawn on this unwritten rule.
Quote:
In comment 14984506 LBH15 said:
Quote:
at someone’s educational or career background on a football fan site. If that’s what happened.
That would really require a “Lord”.
No, sorry..You don’t go to a mod, unless someone’s used your real full name on the site when there’s a disagreement
Just curious BB56. How about if somebody physically threatens you, but gets your identity wrong?
Understood. Aren’t we talking apples and oranges here? A physical threat should be reported whether they know who we are or not. Name calling and heated arguments have gone on since I joined nearly 20 years ago. I wouldn’t report that ever. I’d simply expunge that poster from my BBI life and not interact with them again if the problem became an incessant one.
I have done that with some posters and haven’t conversed with them, nor will I again. But again, unless I feared for my safety, I would NEVER, EVER report someone for being obnoxious. If it got to me, I would no longer interact with them as I indicated above.
Quote:
In comment 14984507 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14984506 LBH15 said:
Quote:
at someone’s educational or career background on a football fan site. If that’s what happened.
That would really require a “Lord”.
No, sorry..You don’t go to a mod, unless someone’s used your real full name on the site when there’s a disagreement
Just curious BB56. How about if somebody physically threatens you, but gets your identity wrong?
Understood. Aren’t we talking apples and oranges here? A physical threat should be reported whether they know who we are or not. Name calling and heated arguments have gone on since I joined nearly 20 years ago. I wouldn’t report that ever. I’d simply expunge that poster from my BBI life and not interact with them again if the problem became an incessant one.
I have done that with some posters and haven’t conversed with them, nor will I again. But again, unless I feared for my safety, I would NEVER, EVER report someone for being obnoxious. If it got to me, I would no longer interact with them as I indicated above.
Fair enough...
You did say that ONLY if they use your real identity.
This case isn't really hypothetical. I did report such a case. And yes, we have both avoided each other.
He lied on this thread about not being asked for us to steer clear of each other.
I have the proof of this lie on this thread if you email me at bbimock@yahoo.com I'd be happy to share said proof with you, provided you agreed to keep it to yourself. I'm not going to post it publicly out of the respect for the confidentiality of the email exchange I had.
Nevertheless, keep posting as you want.
If you are Googs you have become WAY more balanced in your assessments and are way more positive about the team. I feel like Googs was like 3/4 of the way to arniefez, who I agree with sometimes BTW but is probably the most down on the team of anyone here now.
You I wouldn't even put in like the top 10 most down on the team people on the site. So again if you are Googs you've made a concerted effort to change, don't get the obsession but I don't get any of how he behaves really.
I guess just at the sacrifice of each ofher.
Bw, you bring a fresh perspective. I like your posts. Not always in agreement but understand the point of view.
Hope u stick around.
+1
But NGD is correct, that LBH is more positive about the team than Googs was.
I have actually been posting here since the mid 90s before we had a login system. I always went by just "McL". I have had long hiatuses from posting, and people seem to have forgotten me during those. I guess there was a hack at some point, and I lost the McL account, so I just added the 2 dots. But when I came back after in 2018 after about 4 years of not posting, man, people were truly vitriolic thinking I was somebody who seems to have been reviled to the nth degree. I must have missed those threads while I was lurking.
This obsession here of assuming a poster you don't recognize is some evil dupe from the past is just silly. TO the point Bill2 made about the fact that there was a hard boiled crew in the old days, I agree, I remember. Many are gone, some still post but much less now and they're much tamer now when they do (usually, LOL). But in the 90s when you had to type your handle with every post, there was a much greater need for the site to be self policing. It was way too easy for people to hide behind made up handles when they wanted to post something they knew would inflame. There were huge wars about such things at the time. We don't have any such issues with fake handles that are even within 2 orders of magnitude of how bad it was back then. There really isn't the need to keep that old mentality. But some things just die hard I guess.
I've seen so many of those threads over the years, it's not a rare thought for people newer to the board.
Gettleman is a waste of time. He adds as much value as a FMiC post on a Monday morning...nothing
Good night.
Now this is hilarious. Googs being Googs. The fact he keeps denying it makes it even funnier.
I guess just at the sacrifice of each ofher.
LBH15 is 100000% Jimmy Googs. Obvious.
Gettleman is a waste of time. He adds as much value as a FMiC post on a Monday morning...nothing
LOL
Quote:
The moronic things that go on with posters on this site is sad. Can’t believe we all want the best for the Giants, but seemingly we do.
I guess just at the sacrifice of each ofher.
LBH15 is 100000% Jimmy Googs. Obvious.
Not for nothing, but this guy is about as clear as dupe as there is. Never a football thought ever.
If it matters to some of the sadder folks on board. You know who u are.
Quote:
In comment 14984879 LBH15 said:
Quote:
The moronic things that go on with posters on this site is sad. Can’t believe we all want the best for the Giants, but seemingly we do.
I guess just at the sacrifice of each ofher.
LBH15 is 100000% Jimmy Googs. Obvious.
Not for nothing, but this guy is about as clear as dupe as there is. Never a football thought ever.
If it matters to some of the sadder folks on board. You know who u are.
Just admit it LBH15, and I’ll go back to lurking 100%. You are Jimmy Googs. It’s ok, the truth shall set you free.
I see similarities. The less is more approach, sarcasm, arch enemy is FMiC, etc.
I'm just waiting to see if LBH slips and reveals he's a Georgia fan... ;)
Quote:
In comment 14984934 BubbaMojo said:
Quote:
In comment 14984879 LBH15 said:
Quote:
The moronic things that go on with posters on this site is sad. Can’t believe we all want the best for the Giants, but seemingly we do.
I guess just at the sacrifice of each ofher.
LBH15 is 100000% Jimmy Googs. Obvious.
Not for nothing, but this guy is about as clear as dupe as there is. Never a football thought ever.
If it matters to some of the sadder folks on board. You know who u are.
Just admit it LBH15, and I’ll go back to lurking 100%. You are Jimmy Googs. It’s ok, the truth shall set you free.
This Googs guy is like a cult. And you are like a kook.
But also a crickety dupe.
Quote:
but LBH seems different to me for sure. Enjoy both of their contributions
I see similarities. The less is more approach, sarcasm, arch enemy is FMiC, etc.
I'm just waiting to see if LBH slips and reveals he's a Georgia fan... ;)
I do like Georgia. Anybody but Alabama!
Quote:
In comment 14984891 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
but LBH seems different to me for sure. Enjoy both of their contributions
I see similarities. The less is more approach, sarcasm, arch enemy is FMiC, etc.
I'm just waiting to see if LBH slips and reveals he's a Georgia fan... ;)
I do like Georgia. Anybody but Alabama!
A Georgia fan?! Shocking coincidence!
Quote:
but LBH seems different to me for sure. Enjoy both of their contributions
I see similarities. The less is more approach, sarcasm, arch enemy is FMiC, etc.
I'm just waiting to see if LBH slips and reveals he's a Georgia fan... ;)
He has admitted to being a Georgia fan. He’s also slipped up and admitted he lives in the Atlanta area. Just like Googs...
Quote:
In comment 14984891 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
but LBH seems different to me for sure. Enjoy both of their contributions
I see similarities. The less is more approach, sarcasm, arch enemy is FMiC, etc.
I'm just waiting to see if LBH slips and reveals he's a Georgia fan... ;)
He has admitted to being a Georgia fan. He’s also slipped up and admitted he lives in the Atlanta area. Just like Googs...
I think he said he lives somewhere in Florida actually.
He lied on this thread about not being asked for us to steer clear of each other.
I have the proof of this lie on this thread if you email me at bbimock@yahoo.com I'd be happy to share said proof with you, provided you agreed to keep it to yourself. I'm not going to post it publicly out of the respect for the confidentiality of the email exchange I had.
Do you have the email exchange of the mods and I?? I was never told to steer clear of you. Do you want me to post the actual email here??
Let's get something clear here. You emailed the mods with your resume and even threatened slander! Slander of an unknown handle!!! Due to that threat - one that wasn't taken seriously, I was asked not to challenge your credentials. Nothing was said about not challenge shitty takes
At least be transparent here if you are going to keep going on the folly that I was lying. I wasn't going to bring up that you went to the mods - but then you put it out there on this thread.
Just like on football takes, there isn't much "realism" to your posts.
Quote:
You’re following the comments of the wrong guys on here I presume.
Now this is hilarious. Googs being Googs. The fact he keeps denying it makes it even funnier.
It's the long troll. Or as I like to put it - cuntery. And while he tells others how to act here - it is all coming from a previously banned schmuck who had to create another handle to continue his trolling. Even sadder, you know the guy loves it.
Why are people that work in analytics so damn insufferably arrogant? It’s almost universal. Haha, poor Eric. Like he has nothing better to do than sifting through some random posters resume for absolutely no reason. Maybe he’s hiring?
Why are people that work in analytics so damn insufferably arrogant? It’s almost universal. Haha, poor Eric. Like he has nothing better to do than sifting through some random posters resume for absolutely no reason. Maybe he’s hiring?
Agree with the aspect of analytical driven people being extremely arrogant. It seems as if they can never admit their views are wrong. I see it a lot with analysts when discussing the Browns.
Analyzing data helps understand patterns and likelihoods in some systems. And then can be one of the tools used to make decisions in the future. It’s really a quite simple field.
Analyzing data helps understand patterns and likelihoods in some systems. And then can be one of the tools used to make decisions in the future. It’s really a quite simple field.
I agree. For whatever reason it tends to be polarizing on both sides though.
I posted this above, but I give this advice professionally pretty often. All decisions are made on data. The more reasonable data the better, and then it takes discipline and trial and error to figure out which sets are useful.
Then use that data as part of, not the only factor, in the decision making process. And if you’re results are imperfect, but significantly better go get a round of beers.
Why are people that work in analytics so damn insufferably arrogant? It’s almost universal. Haha, poor Eric. Like he has nothing better to do than sifting through some random posters resume for absolutely no reason. Maybe he’s hiring?
BBS - there's even a bigger irony (or hypocrisy) here. Think about this - NGD complained to the mods demanding that his professional credentials aren't challenged.
Meanwhile, what did the guy do over several threads and dozens of posts? Declare that Tyseer Siam is unfit to lead an analytics department because of information he culled from LinkedIn. And since he actually used Siam's name, that definitely passes a higher bar of slander than if somebody is referring to a chucklehead handle of NGD.
Sean. And I dont understand how arrogance helps produce better analysis or consideration of options. My observation over a lot of observations in a lot of industries is that the trait badly limits the number of "good" data scientists and limits the degree of implementation and limits their progress to fully contributing business players.
Christian. I especially liked your last post.
Over emphasis on trying methods and under emphasis on practical application.
Imho its a 90% value on 10% of the possibilities at any one time.
Teaching an organization to be more fact based in their decisions takes years of a patient change agent
I posted this above, but I give this advice professionally pretty often. All decisions are made on data. The more reasonable data the better, and then it takes discipline and trial and error to figure out which sets are useful.
Then use that data as part of, not the only factor, in the decision making process. And if you’re results are imperfect, but significantly better go get a round of beers.
In my experience, understanding what you just posted is what separates successful companies from those that either fail or stagnate at the different stages of the lifecycle of a business.
Everyone uses data. The key is figuring out what is good data, but more importantly, putting processes in place to analyze and separate out the useful information.
Its a slow building organizational competency because you need suction (questions)and engagement from mid level executors and decision makers (need to make them fans of your work).
Lastly, regarding Siam. His background work actually ( projects deployed in a different but very analytical intense industry) the kinds of analytics that should be most valuable to football FO and coaches and players.
Why is anyone attacking him? The responsibility for a sound analytics program is leaders asking the right questions
I posted this above, but I give this advice professionally pretty often. All decisions are made on data. The more reasonable data the better, and then it takes discipline and trial and error to figure out which sets are useful.
Then use that data as part of, not the only factor, in the decision making process. And if you’re results are imperfect, but significantly better go get a round of beers.
This is a great post.
Record, index, tag, everything from every dimension. It’s cheap and progressively easier every year.
Every analysis begins with what did happened. Then why. Then was it a success. Then how to repeat or not repeat it.
I’m particularly interested in telemetry and motion capture for the NFL. So many of the outcomes in the NFL are the product of micro actions and interactions. Getting ahead of that is going to be an advantage in my view over the next few years.
I posted this above, but I give this advice professionally pretty often. All decisions are made on data. The more reasonable data the better, and then it takes discipline and trial and error to figure out which sets are useful.
Then use that data as part of, not the only factor, in the decision making process. And if you’re results are imperfect, but significantly better go get a round of beers.
Interesting thoughts.
I'm in the healthcare space and the use of data analytics is a huge piece of my decision making on the risk management side. We aim to get to the point where the data tells the story (science) and we minimize the art of side of it where we have to apply judgment. But it's a little different in that the Health Econ/Data Analtyics teams are not married to the data and don't die on the hill defending it. They are disciplined to know that the data is only as good as the quality we receive and if we can transform it to our needed specs.
Around 30-40% of the time, however, the data isn't clean - compared to benchmark data that we use to test the validity - and we have to still figure out a way to use it because winning (or retaining) the business is at stake. So we do credibility weighing where we may give the data 25% credibility and apply the other 75% to manual modeling and blend a result from there.
There is a company buy in to our approach - credit to leadership there - and we rarely have any issues with how we prepared our analysis. Getting that buy in to process is a huge hurdle for a company's decision making...
Going to the Mods though? Childish and weak.
Sometimes a child just need to go to the principles office when they refuse to act like anything more than a complete jerk.
Sometimes a child just need to go to the principles office when they refuse to act like anything more than a complete jerk.
Weak.