Quote:
Originally Posted by brorth
So, who would be the better player in that case? I know NA is the bigger name, but was he better last season?
The reason I ask is because I have fallen for the Pro Football Reference Approximate Value as a general indicator of the player's importance to the team.
Arrington does have "better numbers", but his AV is also 8, compared to 7 this season from Asomugha. It's nominal, but it would seem to indicate that Arrington was more valuable to the Pats than Asomugha was to the Eagles.
I'm going round and round with Stafford and Newton in a similar situation. Stafford has more total TDs, passing yards, etc. Newton has the rushing TDs, and their total offense is close, but Newton's AV is 19 as opposed to Stafford's 16.
I guess a lot of it will have to do with how the scoring is weighted, as far as determining the better player, or am I putting way too much stock in the AV from Pro Football Reference?
|
It really comes down to what you trust as indicators of who the better football player is. We don't want to reveal how we're programming because we don't want players to "game the system" and base their lineups on some number rather than emulating coaches and GMs who have to make judgments with their eyes.
So you've got several things to work from. You have stats, you have your own perceptions, you have what you hear from talking heads, you have references like Pro Football Reference and Pro Football Focus, you have contract values, and lots of other stuff. You have to decide what you trust and what you don't.
I will say, though, that performances are based on the previous season and not career, so starting some injured scrub like Peyton Manning who didn't even play last year may not be a good idea compared to a lesser-known guy who had a good year, like maybe Alex Smith.