Love this idea and data, but ... "But among teams with real samples for comparison, the Vikings are No. 1 — buoyed by Nick Mullens, Darnold and KIRK COUSINS performing better in Minnesota than elsewhere." This had to be filed before the two-minute warning in Philly Monday night.
Three quick reactions. I find it difficult to believe that Cam Newton was better in New England than in Carolina...no?
Second, instead of teams, would not looking at head coaches be a better potential high level initial correlative variable than jerseys given the churn in staff over time? Playing QB for Kevin O'Connell feels a lot different than Mike Zimmer. You can then potentially segment the "types" of coaches that are more likely to be successful at transfer e.g. offense v. defense minded, McVay tree etc.
Finally, it would be interesting to examine those that did better and what exogenous factors likely contributed to that improvement. Factors that feel relevant are Pressure% (OL); Team Defense (lower opponent scores); Approximate Value receiving corp; age/experience etc.
Take Darnold:
McVay Tree offensive HC - check
Team Defense - check
WR/TE AV - check
Pressure % - check
Age - check
Darnold feels like a great gamble. That sort of deeper dive would help front offices decide whether to pursue a suboptimal QB to wager on future improvement. Thanks very much.
Love this idea and data, but ... "But among teams with real samples for comparison, the Vikings are No. 1 — buoyed by Nick Mullens, Darnold and KIRK COUSINS performing better in Minnesota than elsewhere." This had to be filed before the two-minute warning in Philly Monday night.
Yeah….
1:46 is the definition of small sample size
Three quick reactions. I find it difficult to believe that Cam Newton was better in New England than in Carolina...no?
Second, instead of teams, would not looking at head coaches be a better potential high level initial correlative variable than jerseys given the churn in staff over time? Playing QB for Kevin O'Connell feels a lot different than Mike Zimmer. You can then potentially segment the "types" of coaches that are more likely to be successful at transfer e.g. offense v. defense minded, McVay tree etc.
Finally, it would be interesting to examine those that did better and what exogenous factors likely contributed to that improvement. Factors that feel relevant are Pressure% (OL); Team Defense (lower opponent scores); Approximate Value receiving corp; age/experience etc.
Take Darnold:
McVay Tree offensive HC - check
Team Defense - check
WR/TE AV - check
Pressure % - check
Age - check
Darnold feels like a great gamble. That sort of deeper dive would help front offices decide whether to pursue a suboptimal QB to wager on future improvement. Thanks very much.
2019 Cam Newton (all 2 games of it)... Remember this only looks at 2019-2024.
That said, I agree on coaches. Something to look at for the future!