See copyright notice at the bottom of this page.
List of All Posters
Where have you gone Tom Boswell? (January 7, 2004)
Discussion ThreadPosted 7:46 p.m.,
January 14, 2004
(#13) -
DavidSmyth
---". I expect the football HOF to be filled with QBs and not having many OTs. You need 1 of each on your team, but the impact of the QB is far higher."
This may seem obvious, because of the attention paid to the QB, and because of the salaries paid to QBs vs OTs. But I have never seen any sore of "proof". A starting player's value is essentially how many more runs or points he contributes than his expected backup. So, if, say, a typical backup QB is 90% as good as a starter, and a backup OT is only 80% as good as a starter (perhaps because of the unusual size/skill blend necessary for line positions), then that might outweigh the difference between the avg QB and the avg OT.
Probably not--I have no real reason to dispute the common wisdom--but has anyone ever studied the differences between repl levels for the various football positions?
Aaron's Baseball Blog - Basketball (February 9, 2004)
Posted 5:29 p.m.,
February 9, 2004
(#21) -
DavidSmyth
If 2 QBs have the same yds/att (say 8.0), but different completion % (say 50% vs 60%), then for the 60% guy to be more valuable, you have to make the case, I think, that the individual play in football is an opportunity unit. It might be true that the 60% guy will make more 1st downs, and keep drives going, but it also may be the case that the 50% guy will throw for more TDs. That is, is 10 passes of 10 yds each really the same as 1 pass of 100 yds (guaranteeing a TD)? And if so, or if not, how much credit goes to the QB, and how much to the receiver and his yds after catch? I have no idea if, after you have yds/att, the completion% has an impact. There simply hasn't been enough research by the stat-savvy crowd.