Analytical comparison of next years team vs. this years team

[AEBison1998]

For any other former NDSU grads from the engineering college, I thought it would be fun to try a weighted comparison of this years team to next years team at each position. The goal is to see if we will be better next year than this years. Just a little fun here. Nothing too serious.

Anyway, I gave a numerical value to each position relative to last years starter. For instance if I expect next years punter to be much better than this year I gave that position a +2. If I expect it to be just a little better I gave it a +1. Even: zero, a little worse: -1, a lot worse: -2.

I came up with a sum total of -1 for next year. That would indicate that next years team (as I see it right now) will be almost exactly as good as this years team. What do you guys think? Do you have a better formula. Give it a try. Or fill in your own scoring and see what total you come up with.

Position Weighting
QB 1
TB 0
FB -1
WR -2
WR -1
TE 0
LT 1
FT 1
LG 1
RG 1
C -2
NG 1
DT 1
LE 0
RE 0
LOLB -2
ROLB -2
MLB 1
FS -2
SS 1
CB 0
CB 0
K 1
P 1
Sum Total -1

[CaBisonFan]

For any other former NDSU grads from the engineering college, I thought it would be fun to try a weighted comparison of this years team to next years team at each position. The goal is to see if we will be better next year than this years. Just a little fun here. Nothing too serious.

Sum Total -1

This is cool. I would disagree with the scores given on defense. Think we'll pick it up at defensive end and do better than you've forecasted at OLB.

But...if the QB can turn into a strong leader...it changes the whole formula for the better. That's the X-Factor.

[TheDoctor]

This is cool. I would disagree with the scores given on defense. Think we'll pick it up at defensive end and do better than you've forecasted at OLB.

But...if the QB can turn into a strong leader...it changes the whole formula for the better. That's the X-Factor.

We are losing Joe Lardnios not to mention Compton and we will be better at DE? Those are some LARGE shoes to fill! ;)

[CaBisonFan]

We are losing Joe Lardnios not to mention Compton and we will be better at DE? Those are some LARGE shoes to fill! ;)

The young defensive ends are 'very' talented and will rise to the occasion.

But is there something about the total domination of Lardinois & Compton that I've missed? I thought that they were solid performers.

Just wondering.

[TheDoctor]

Just wondering.

He gave the ends both a 0 - so he is saying that next years ends wash out what this years did. You said you disagree and that they will "step it up". I said "better that Lardinois and Compton. Those are large shoes to fill." So, I am agreeing with him that the ends will be as good at best, not better. If your looking for a "bible" full of deep toughts and statistics, thats not my style. I was simply making the comment that Joe Lardinos's shoes will be difficult to fill, let alone out perform next year. Thats it.

[unbison]

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 101
AEBison1998 has a spectacular aura aboutAEBison1998 has a spectacular aura about
Default Analytical comparison of next years team vs. this years team
For any other former NDSU grads from the engineering college, I thought it would be fun to try a weighted comparison of this years team to next years team at each position. The goal is to see if we will be better next year than this years. Just a little fun here. Nothing too serious.

To whomever started this thread:

Engineers are the most pompous arrogant unrealistic bunch of people to ever roam this planet...... if they only knew as much as they thought..... the world would be built without change orders or extras....lol

Edit by admin: I've personally deleted three of unbison's posts in the last 24 hours. That's a non-spammer record - only the perma-banned pantherhawk comes close. One way another, it'll stop.

[AEBison1998]

[QUOTE=unbison;240471]To whomever started this thread:

Engineers are the most pompous arrogant unrealistic bunch of people to ever roam this planet...... if they only knew as much as they thought..... the world would be built without change orders or extras....lol

QUOTE]

This thread is about the football team. If you don't like engineers...stay off the trains. :D

[Ricky Bobby]

Who thinks of this stuff??? You guys have way to much time on your hands and I am that much dumber for actually having read this thread.

[extremerouge]

Who thinks of this stuff??? You guys have way to much time on your hands and I am that much dumber for actually having read this thread.
really? I think it sounds kinda fun...I'm not an engineer, but it sounds like something fun for the nerds that are engineers to occupy their time with...

[lakesbison]

NERDS being the operative word there.

Tony.. I can't believe you deleted a "RECORD SETTING" performance by unbison... that's like the Fargo Forum deleting last nights record by weekend.

[SDbison]

For any other former NDSU grads from the engineering college, I thought it would be fun to try a weighted comparison of this years team to next years team at each position. The goal is to see if we will be better next year than this years. Just a little fun here. Nothing too serious.

Anyway, I gave a numerical value to each position relative to last years starter. For instance if I expect next years punter to be much better than this year I gave that position a +2. If I expect it to be just a little better I gave it a +1. Even: zero, a little worse: -1, a lot worse: -2.

I came up with a sum total of -1 for next year. That would indicate that next years team (as I see it right now) will be almost exactly as good as this years team. What do you guys think? Do you have a better formula. Give it a try. Or fill in your own scoring and see what total you come up with.

Position Weighting
QB 1
TB 0
FB -1
WR -2
WR -1
TE 0
LT 1
FT 1
LG 1
RG 1
C -2
NG 1
DT 1
LE 0
RE 0
LOLB -2
ROLB -2
MLB 1
FS -2
SS 1
CB 0
CB 0
K 1
P 1
Sum Total -1
Would definitely like to see a detailed explanation for your +2's and -2's. Also maybe a brief comment next to the +1's and -1's. Seems this analysis in sum total verifies what I have subjectively thought......next years team, to start out with, will likely be worse than this years team. And you even gave the QB and kicker +1. That is doubtful based on current talent available. To me without replacements both of these positions will be 0's.
I like the numerical justification instead of just a bunch of random thoughts and statements by most people posting here. Rep points to you!

[Gully]

Would definitely like to see a detailed explanation for your +2's and -2's. Also maybe a brief comment next to the +1's and -1's. Seems this analysis in sum total verifies what I have subjectively thought......next years team, to start out with, will likely be worse than this years team. And you even gave the QB and kicker +1. That is doubtful based on current talent available. To me without replacements both of these positions will be 0's.
I like the numerical justification instead of just a bunch of random thoughts and statements by most people posting here. Rep points to you!

Except that the numbers are just an attempt to quantify his random thoughts and statements. Nothing wrong with that.....just pointing out that it's not somehow the final answer because it's expressed in numbers, it's still based on subjective thought.

[AEBison1998]

Good comments. It isn't meant to be too technical. Here's how I started thinking about it...at the end of the season I was discouraged because I felt like this was the year that we had all the pieces in place to make a nice run. I thought with the large senior class we would have a year or two before we would rebuild enough to seriously contend again. So I thought through the spots position by position to see where we would be better or worse. I was surprised by how well we did in that quick analysis (I spent all of about 15 minutes on it...so I can't claim its anything special). So I tried it again with some weighting...and you saw the result (about 10 minutes this time, so again I'm not saying this is the final word). But the end result is that we are going to be better in a number of positions next year. Quite a few more than I expected. I liked what I saw. If we pick up a few key JUCO's... we could be tough. I'll give some reasons for my numbers, but I'll wait a day or so and see if anyone else has some thoughts first.

[SDbison]

Except that the numbers are just an attempt to quantify his random thoughts and statements. Nothing wrong with that.....just pointing out that it's not somehow the final answer because it's expressed in numbers, it's still based on subjective thought.
True, but at least each position was weighed individually rather than just considering a few positions and some overall gut feeling.

[Gully]

Are all positions equal? I think we found out the answer to that this year. Perhaps you could truly weight the scores for each position? For example, QB is more important than say, fullback. If it's twice as important, it should receive twice as much weight in the overall score, so a huge improvement at QB could be worth 4 while a huge dropoff at FB would only count as -2. Of course then we'll all argue about how much "weight" each position should receive.

[NorthernBison]

Are all positions equal? I think we found out the answer to that this year. Perhaps you could truly weight the scores for each position? For example, QB is more important than say, fullback. If it's twice as important, it should receive twice as much weight in the overall score, so a huge improvement at QB could be worth 4 while a huge dropoff at FB would only count as -2. Of course then we'll all argue about how much "weight" each position should receive.

You beat me to it. The example I thought of is going from an all-world Middle Linebacker like Joe Mays to somebody that is very good but just not the same. That tends to affect the entire defense. We found out this year just how important the middle is.

Rating the relative importance of each position would certainly give us something to argue about until next season starts.

[AEBison1998]

I like the way you guys think. What are some good ways to weight the position? Maybe we could use the percent of plays a position is involved as one criteria. The QB touches the ball on every offensive play (excpet punts and kicks). A Left tackle is important on every pass play or any run to the left side and so on.

But how about an offense (like the Babich one) where we run the ball three times and then thow a bomb. The reciever gets just one play, but it's a big deal if there is a completion.

Any other thoughts from anyone?

[BlueBisonRock]

You beat me to it. The example I thought of is going from an all-world Middle Linebacker like Joe Mays to somebody that is very good but just not the same. That tends to affect the entire defense. We found out this year just how important the middle is.

Rating the relative importance of each position would certainly give us something to argue about until next season starts.

In essence, there is another analytical card to be played: The relationship card which turns this from a grouping of individuals to a team.

Consider the relationship between the QB and the Center; the QB and the the backs; the QB and the receivers; the Center and the rest of the line; relationship between individual receivers. Etc. (same with the D). Call it the chemistry factor(s). Solve this and you can get published in some academic journal. :D

[TransAmBison]

Are all positions equal? I think we found out the answer to that this year. Perhaps you could truly weight the scores for each position? For example, QB is more important than say, fullback. If it's twice as important, it should receive twice as much weight in the overall score, so a huge improvement at QB could be worth 4 while a huge dropoff at FB would only count as -2. Of course then we'll all argue about how much "weight" each position should receive.
I don't know...I definitely think the fullback should weigh more than the quarterback. :D

[Gully]

I don't know...I definitely think the fullback should weigh more than the quarterback. :D

Ya, I suppose I shouldn't have been yelling at you from a section over in the 2nd half of the Jacks game about how well Mertens was playing....that may have been the turning point in that game!

[TransAmBison]

Ya, I suppose I shouldn't have been yelling at you from a section over in the 2nd half of the Jacks game about how well Mertens was playing....that may have been the turning point in that game!
You sure looked like you were right at that point. I sure wish I was wrong. He was doing awesome at that point. We'll have to have a beer together next season and discuss strategy!

[KilldeerBison]

Also, include special teams play. A few tears back when Shamon was healthy, he could change a game on one play. How important is making an extra point/ field goal, or blocking a punt. How about not letting the other team have such good kick returns or making them start inside their own 20 yard line on punts (punt out of bounds). The list can go on but you get the point, special teams can win games.

[AEBison1998]

Well, I had a little time in between a few family Christmas celebrations today and did a little more think'in. Here is a little reason for the numbers I chose for each position:

1.) If the starter does not graduate then I gave the position a 1. Take the QB for example. Mertens will no doubt learn from the things he struggled with the year and work to improve them. The coaches will play to his strength as well. So we should see improvement there. If someone were to beat him out, then it is only because there is improvement also. Either way my thinking is that a returning starter will be improved next year. (The kicker might be the exception to this rule as it seems that we went the wrong way this year.)

2.) The -2's were for 4 year starters that remained relatively healthy for their career. These were very talented players and their backups have not had many reps. So I expected to see a noticeable drop off there.

3.) On the fence: I wouldn't walk across the street to argue with how I called the following positions because we have young players that we don't know how they will do yet: DE, FB, TE, CB, WR2.

4.) The tailback position being called as a zero (even from last year) is more of an overall evaluation rather than just the starter. Tyler and Pat both played hurt a good share of the year and they had two real young guys behind them. Hopefully the whole tailback depth chart as a whole will make up for the loss of Tyler the Truck. He will certainly be missed. It is also hard to compare P^2 to Tyler since they run so differently. I like our backs for next year.

[AEBison1998]

Here is an update from my scoring. Feel free to disagree and/or comment. That's what makes this sort of thing fun. Just give reasons for what you think. I added PR and KR positions since last time.

I added a "big play factor" for the skill positions but it didn't make much of a difference in my scenario because the QB, PR, KR, K improvement offset the WR and FB scores. So I just left it off.

To summarize, even with a huge and talented senior class graduating, I was pleased to see that we have a shot to be as good or better next year than we were this year. And if we pick up a few JUCO's in a couple spots, I think we should certainly be better. Here you go.

Explanation of columns
Position: self explanitory
Score: 1, better, 2 much better, 0 even, -1, poorer, -2 much poorer
% of plays: percent of the plays that these positions directly impact
Weighting: score multipled by the percent of plays they contribute to.

Position Score % of Plays Weighting
QB 1 0.75 0.75
TB 0 0.6 0
FB -1 0.6 -0.6
WR 1 -2 0.5 -1
WR 2 -1 0.5 -0.5
TE 0 0.6 0
LT 1 0.75 0.75
RT 1 0.75 0.75
LG 1 0.75 0.75
RG 1 0.75 0.75
C -2 0.75 -1.5
NG 1 0.75 0.75
DT 1 0.75 0.75
LE 0 0.75 0
RE 0 0.75 0
LOLB -2 0.5 -1
ROLB -2 0.5 -1
MLB 1 0.75 0.75
FS -2 0.6 -1.2
SS 1 0.6 0.6
CB 1 0 0.3 0
CB 2 0 0.3 0
K 1 0.1 0.1
P 1 0.1 0.1
KR 1 0.1 0.1
PR 1 0.1 0.1

Sum 1 0.2