More bad news for Ezekiel Elliott and Melvin Gordon: Receiving RBs don't matter either

[polamalubeast]

The nerds landed yet another blow in the War on Running Backs this week when The Athletic’s Ben Baldwin, a prominent member of NFL Nerd Twitter, wrote an illuminating piece with the headline “Throwing to running backs: The latest NFL craze that doesn’t make any sense.”

In the piece, Baldwin presents evidence showing that passing attempts to running backs are far less efficient than those to traditional pass catchers. By a wide margin.

He writes…



Here’s a basic overview of Expected Points Added (EPA) per play by targeted position on first or second down. (Throughout this piece, we’re going to be looking at first and second downs only. The concern with third downs is that running back targets on those downs could be disproportionately check-downs that are doomed to failure. In an effort to level the playing field, let’s look at these early-down attempts.) As always, a huge thank you to nflscrapR for making the data readily available.


read more

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/08/eze...eceiving-stats

[Mojouw]

Sigggggggghhhhhhhhhh.

This kinda crap is why people hate analytics and the sometimes dummies who write about them. I can not read the Athletic because I don't want to pay them money, but based on the summary article, here is all the things the author is missing in his analysis:

1. Passing to RBs is not meant to be as effective as passing to a WR. It is meant to create SPACE in the offense.
2. Why no analysis of the effectiveness of a passing game overall with a high # of RB pass targets compared to one with a low # of pass targets to a RB?
3. No attempt to explore the relationship between pass targets to a RB and efficiency in the running game.

I could go on. But the bottom line (again I did not read the original article in the Athletic) is that pass targets to the running back are not about replicating the success of passing to a WR. They are about forcing alignment changes to the defense, spreading the defense out horizontally, and creating space for other players to get free vertically.

But again, what do I know. I'm just some guy mashing keys on a keyboard.

[polamalubeast]

Sigggggggghhhhhhhhhh.

This kinda crap is why people hate analytics and the sometimes dummies who write about them. I can not read the Athletic because I don't want to pay them money, but based on the summary article, here is all the things the author is missing in his analysis:

1. Passing to RBs is not meant to be as effective as passing to a WR. It is meant to create SPACE in the offense.
2. Why no analysis of the effectiveness of a passing game overall with a high # of RB pass targets compared to one with a low # of pass targets to a RB?
3. No attempt to explore the relationship between pass targets to a RB and efficiency in the running game.

I could go on. But the bottom line (again I did not read the original article in the Athletic) is that pass targets to the running back are not about replicating the success of passing to a WR. They are about forcing alignment changes to the defense, spreading the defense out horizontally, and creating space for other players to get free vertically.

But again, what do I know. I'm just some guy mashing keys on a keyboard.

I still thinks that a checkdown to a RB must never be the first or even the second option for a QB... It's a good idea to pass to the RB only if your WR or TE are not open to avoid a sack or a negative play(including a incomplete pass).

[Mojouw]

Posted 36 minutes ago
44 minutes ago, TheVillain112 said:
It's all about EPA/efficiency. In the article, it does point out passing to a RB in 2nd and 10 is better than running the ball on 2nd and 10. But both are less efficient then a pass to a TE/WR who are going to (typically) gain more yards. Also, in terms of risk (i.e. turnovers) and incompletions, all of that is taking into account with EPA (as best as a stat can).

Those articles aren't saying eliminate it, but highlighting that 'we need to pass more to our RBs' isn't an ideal strategy, unless you are talking replacing rushing attempts with passing attempts to RBs...

I still thinks that a checkdown to a RB must never be the first or even the second option for a QB... It's a good idea to pass to the RB only if your WR or TE are not open to avoid a sack or a negative play(including a incomplete pass).

That is all well and good -- and statistically true. And I love stats. All of the stats. The more #'s the better. But you have to place those numbers back into a larger context. Based on what I can see of the work, it looks, to me, like this issue is isolated and examined outside of how it impacts other parts of the game.

For instance, look at the Rams, Patriots, Eagles, Steelers, Saints, Chiefs. All teams that target their RBs a pretty good amount in the passing game. Sometimes it is to get the ball in a dynamic playmaker's hands. Sometimes it is to replace a run. And sometimes (fairly often I think) it is to force the defense to move a LB or DB from the middle of the field to the edge of the field. Then run a TE or WR back into the middle of the field to expose the space created for a "big" play downfield. That is all set up by the frequent and repeated targets to the RB. A "decoy" is not effective if it doesn't represent a real threat.

Additionally, targeting your RB creates other problems for the defense. It forces them to consider their personnel packages. Hard to put your "run stuffing" package on the field consistently if a team is just going to motion the RB out of the back-field and pass. Then you go nickel and they run right at you. If you never target your RBs (say like Jacksonville), you can just line up and sell out to stop the run.

Long story short, stats are great. Data is great. Complex analysis is great. But in this case, it seems to be reaching a conclusion, but maybe for the wrong reasons? Is the goal of targeting RBs in the passing game even about efficiency? Or is it to create mismatches and settings for other play calls to succeed?

[tube517]

Zeke and Melvin go jetskiing lately?

[polamalubeast]

[Born2Steel]

Then there's the Alvin Kamara effect, The Darren Sproles report card, and the Le'Veon Bell balance sheet to consider.