Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike FF Today

Regression Candidates - RBs/WRs/TEs

Recommended Posts

And here we are with the WRs and TEs as promised. Good work here by Doug.

 

Some interesting data on JuJu. I think most are expecting a significant boost in his production but the consensus is likely running a little hot right now.

 

Doug and have both projected about the same: 78-1014-7 & 75-1045-7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm missing the point? There is no such thing as "positive touchdown regression." Scoring more TDs than the previous year is a progression.

Well it depends. For a data set, the term arithmetic mean, or sometimes "average" are used to refer to a central value. In this case simply the sum of the values divided by the number of values. This is for a basic discrete set of numbers.

 

So in a very basic view of the data, in this case a positive regression would be a "positive" (whether + or -) value compared to whatever you are measuring statistically from the previous cycle of measurement back towards the mean given that the previous measurement was actually "negative" or below the mean.

 

So if a player has a mean of 1000 yards rushing over 8 years, and last year he rushed for 800 yards, then 900 would be a positve regression. Now, that statement can be picked apart in many ways but I think that is the gist of what is being referred to here as "positive regression". No?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff from Doug. I scanned them real quick and saw a couple I may disagree with, but I'll have to sit and actually read the reasoning (when I get the chance), as it very well could change mind. Thanks for the info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm missing the point? There is no such thing as "positive touchdown regression." Scoring more TDs than the previous year is a progression.

 

I thought the same thing and kind of still do. However, you've got to pick your battles in this life and this isn't one I'm willing to fight with the fantasy industry ... at least not yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I thought the same thing and kind of still do. However, you've got to pick your battles in this life and this isn't one I'm willing to fight with the fantasy industry ... at least not yet.

It's a positive regression towards the mean. If used correctly in the fantasy stat analysis, that is valid terminology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a positive regression towards the mean. If used correctly in the fantasy stat analysis, that is valid terminology.

 

I understand. That is ultimately why I used it. It's just a bit of an oxymoron and it seems like there should be a better phrase to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting analysis as always. Doug thank you.

I think it is often easier to pick negative regression vs positive. All the players IDd for + regression are over 30.

I believe relative skill position efficiency over the age of 28 is on a downward plane so this will be interesting at least as to the wr and rob positions. I think theres less predictability at the TE position.

 

I am starting to incorporate an age cap in my drafts. An older player has to fall a bit for me to draft that player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting analysis as always. Doug thank you.

I think it is often easier to pick negative regression vs positive. All the players IDd for + regression are over 30.

I believe relative skill position efficiency over the age of 28 is on a downward plane so this will be interesting at least as to the wr and rob positions. I think theres less predictability at the TE position.

 

I am starting to incorporate an age cap in my drafts. An older player has to fall a bit for me to draft that player

 

Thanks DrG. You seem to be as big of fan as my work as anyone on here. (Of which there are many ...)

 

I'm not following one of your comments about all of my positive regression candidates being over 30 though. I think less than half of my WRs/TEs are. I can only see on RB that is.

 

As for the age cap, I'm doing something similar. I'm not sure I have an official age yet for each position, but I have a general range. I'd say 28 is often the last "elite year" most RBs have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it depends. For a data set, the term arithmetic mean, or sometimes "average" are used to refer to a central value. In this case simply the sum of the values divided by the number of values. This is for a basic discrete set of numbers.

 

So in a very basic view of the data, in this case a positive regression would be a "positive" (whether + or -) value compared to whatever you are measuring statistically from the previous cycle of measurement back towards the mean given that the previous measurement was actually "negative" or below the mean.

 

So if a player has a mean of 1000 yards rushing over 8 years, and last year he rushed for 800 yards, then 900 would be a positve regression. Now, that statement can be picked apart in many ways but I think that is the gist of what is being referred to here as "positive regression". No?

Perhaps the point you are missing is that the mean is not over a eight year period, but rather just compared to last season's numbers. It is based on a one year cycle, not a cumulative view of data.

 

It's an oxymoron as said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the point you are missing is that the mean is not over a eight year period, but rather just compared to last season's numbers. It is based on a one year cycle, not a cumulative view of data.

 

It's an oxymoron as said.

There has to be a mean for there to be positive regression. That's the definition of it in a way. Plus, you have to compare it to last year's stats in this case as that is what is being compared. Last year's stat vs. that which is projected this year based upon how that player performed in that area over his NFL career. Are you saying the player in question out performed his yearly average last year for stat in question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have clarified .... rbs yes

Generally I think there is some wr fade after 28 but then there are guys like roddy white, Brandon Marshall etc. I think rbs are most productive under age 26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×