What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Approximate Value Before 1960 (1 Viewer)

Justin McCarthy

Footballguy
I'm a new member here, and recently I've been considering how to compare players who played before 1960 in the NFL and AAFC (potentially) to players of since then, as pro football reference's approximate value is only for seasons since 1960, and from what I've seen, it's because the last stat that gets factored into AV for players is sacks for defensive players, listed for players since 1960, and every other stat was recorded at some point before then.

First for players who debuted before 1960, I looked at players who were in the top 250 in AV and the ranges of 116-87 who debuted before 1960 to calculate numbers for the offensive players, and for the defensive players, most of them played the majority of their careers in the AV era, so I used their average AV and applied them to their seasons before 1960, but 2 of the players I looked at, Doug Atkins and Joe Fortunato, had their AV year seasons at less than 50% of their pre-AV seasons, but I calculated Doug Atkins as he didn't start all the time and I got a good number out of it, but I didn't for Joe Fortunato as he was a starter in his 5 pre-AV seasons, and I didn't want to apply his average from 7 seasons to his pre-AV years as I thought the numbers would be too high and it might not make sense for him as he was only a pro bowler once.

Secondly, I looked at other players who debuted before 1960 who could be some of the best of all time using the Pro Football Hall of Fame's All-Decade Teams, MVP award winners, statistical bonuses in PFR's Hall of Fame Monitor method, the 3 NFL Anniversary Teams, and Hall of Famers, and I chose the players who I think I could calculate AVs for, applying to quarterbacks, halfbacks, tailbacks, fullbacks, wide receivers/ends, one tight end, offensive linemen, two linebackers, and one defensive back. The skill position players I'll only calculate value for if they debuted in 1932 or later or had the majority of their career in 1932 or later as that's when yardage, pass attempts, and rushing attempts stats are available. For the defensive players, I can use what I did the first time for, but for the offensive linemen, they get value added from All-Pro teams and Pro Bowls, and there was no Pro Bowl or equivalent game from 1920-1937 and 1943-1949, so one of the questions I want answered is if the current method should be used or the method should be modified and how for offensive linemen in those years. For players who are acknowledged for being two way, playing both offense and defense, I don't know if I should only count them for offense if they're only listed with an offensive position, and if I should count any of them for defense whether they're listed as a position or not. This applies to players who played an offensive and defensive position in a season like Chuck Bednarik, who was both a linebacker and center for several seasons. Lastly, for offense, punting stats are only available after 1939, field goals attempted are only available after 1938, and turnovers are only available after 1932, so I want to know how offenses should be calculated in those years or if they should be calculated at all because the stats weren't available.

I don't know if this is the best idea because I've heard that approximate value is not the best method to use for comparing players across positions and eras, and if AV was even made with equivalents for pre-1960 in mind, but I'd like to hear what anyone who sees this thinks. I wanted to ask these questions because the first 2 quarterbacks for me, Y.A. Tittle and Bobby Layne, were easy, but the next quarterback is Sammy Baugh, who has been called a two-way player and his first two years had no punting stats and field goals attempted in his first year, and I don't wanna give up hope on this project just yet as Sammy Baugh has the passing stats, but the teams had incomplete offenses, so I don't necessarily want to average his numbers from 1939 to 1952 and apply them to his first 2 seasons when his passing stats are complete for all of his career, but if you guys think that's what I should do, and the same for other players if the majority of their seasons are 1939 and afterwards, then that's what I'll do. If you guys are also interested in seeing the players I'm considering, then I'll post them in a list for you, sorted by position.
 
No help either but not trying to shill for anyone, Michael Lombardi has a book coming out in September that you might be intrested in reading. I've heard it's been dubbed as something loosley similar to Bill Simmons book of basketball with respect to I think he tries to tackle rankings of players from pretty much the beginning.
 
MTskibum, I'm doing this because a year and a few months ago, I tried to figure out who would get into the Hall of Fame from 2002 to 2022 using AV and eligible players in those years. I didn't think the list was good enough however, and a few months ago I had the idea of trying it again for 2003 to 2023, but this time by using eligible players with AV and getting into the Hall of Fame by having an at least 100 HOF monitor score, being a finalist with an at least 80 score, and being a semifinalist with an at least 60 score. When I got to the seniors for the Class of 2020, as there were 20 candidates and 10 who got in, I only limited myself to the top 250 in AV as some of the players on the actual ballot played before 1960, and some of them got in, so I didn't entirely want to favor players who played in the post-1960 era as a result. 4 of the players I looked at for the seniors debuted before 1960, 3 defensive players and 1 quarterback, John Brodie, and I thought for him he had incomplete value that I could calculate before 1960, which is what I did, and because more players might be in the top 250 if their AV was counted before 1960, that's why I had the idea of doing the first part of my original post, and then the second part of it, to create what I feel like is an accurate list, and also for comparing as it's not the easiest thing to do in my mind, especially across positions. I hope you understand what I said.
 
Sid Luckman is always a name the comes to mind for me, as somebody pre-1960 that isn't talked about enough. He and Sammy Baugh were probably equals.

4 championships, while also punting and playing DB.

His 1943 season is maybe the best season any player has ever had at any position in NFL history. Had 4 INTs as a DB, while having insane passing stats for the time:
55% completions, 2200 yards, 28 TDs, 11 YPA, 108 passer rating. Then he crushed it in the championship game that year with 286 yards and 5 TDs and 0 INTs.

The one knock you can have on this era, is Luckman (and Baugh) benefitted a little from World War 2 potentially taking some of the better players away, making competition easier, though I'm not really sure how that can be assessed.

I think players who played both ways probably should be given extra credit, as long as they were good at both spots. I think of it like, if say, Jalen Hurts was also a starting caliber Safety on top of his QB play, he'd have a case for best player in the NFL, versus just a top-5 QB. Side note, I'd also wonder how valuable that would be in the salary cap era, to have a guy who played both ways.
 
MTskibum, I'm doing this because a year and a few months ago, I tried to figure out who would get into the Hall of Fame from 2002 to 2022 using AV and eligible players in those years. I didn't think the list was good enough however, and a few months ago I had the idea of trying it again for 2003 to 2023, but this time by using eligible players with AV and getting into the Hall of Fame by having an at least 100 HOF monitor score, being a finalist with an at least 80 score, and being a semifinalist with an at least 60 score. When I got to the seniors for the Class of 2020, as there were 20 candidates and 10 who got in, I only limited myself to the top 250 in AV as some of the players on the actual ballot played before 1960, and some of them got in, so I didn't entirely want to favor players who played in the post-1960 era as a result. 4 of the players I looked at for the seniors debuted before 1960, 3 defensive players and 1 quarterback, John Brodie, and I thought for him he had incomplete value that I could calculate before 1960, which is what I did, and because more players might be in the top 250 if their AV was counted before 1960, that's why I had the idea of doing the first part of my original post, and then the second part of it, to create what I feel like is an accurate list, and also for comparing as it's not the easiest thing to do in my mind, especially across positions. I hope you understand what I said.

Why the interest in using this data to determine your own hall of fame candidates?

Are you just curious who you would put in the hall of fame if you were in charge?
 
Why the interest in using this data to determine your own hall of fame candidates?

Are you just curious who you would put in the hall of fame if you were in charge?
I felt like from the years I looked at for the Hall of Fame, I wanted to see if my method matched up to what was actually true, and see what could've happened from my method instead of what actually happened, and there might have been some players who got into the Hall of Fame in that time who from what I've looked at don't seem like the biggest Hall of Fame candidates relative to the guys they went up against. Also, the AV method's only been around since 2008, but as it's a pretty good method to use for its purpose, I wanted to apply it with the HOF monitor scores and what players to consider from a range for the Hall of Fame. If you think that this isn't something I should try to do, then I won't do it, but others might think differently, and I think it's up to you to decide whether you go against what they say or not.
 
Hello anyone who might still view this, it's been 24 hours since my last post and I wanted to check in to see if the reason for why nothing has happened is because people forgot about this, or they wanted to move on. I think I still have a chance with what can be decided from this, whether it's meaningful to my intentions or not, but I either need concrete answers for advice/help or no help or I won't think that this thread is complete yet. I don't know who will see this, but I'm posting it anyways to see what will happen.
 
I do not know how you can compare era's when DB's could mug WR's and RB's were just as big or bigger then linebackers.
Offensive linemen were anywhere from 230-260 pounds. That 230 is not a typo.

QB's threw equal amount of INT's as TD's.

Completely different game.
 
It's been a week since the last reply was posted here, so because of that, I want to make another reply as I think there's still some potential for this. Besides what I've already said, something I realized in the week since then was that in my original post I forgot to mention that the NFL All-Star Game from 1938 to 1942 was the best players in the league against the league champion, meaning everyone on the team was in the game, and it's not really an indicator of how good any of them are because they're there as they won the championship, and the only players who would most likely make sense from the championship team are the ones who were named All-Pro. I'm open to people giving me advice or recommending me to not do this, but as things haven't happened for a week by now, I want to see again if people either forgot about this, didn't have anything to say, or just moved on. I also don't know if anyone will this reply as it's been that long, but once again, I'm still posting it to see what will happen.
 
It's been a month since I last spoke on this thread, but I wanted to post for one more time until I give up in case people forgot about this again or for new people to see it. I won't change anything about what I said, and I'm not trying to be so desperate to go ahead with something, but I still feel like people can give me good advice to go ahead with this, or to not, which I'm fine with as well. This is essentially my last attempt at my original thoughts trying to go somewhere, but if no one responds, I won't be mad about it, because no one responded the last time and as I said, I'm not trying to be so desperate. And lastly, I'm still posting this to see what will happen.
 
I’m always interested in this stuff. Unfortunately comparing football players from different eras is very hard to do, the game evolves so quickly. Case in point, watch some nfl games on YouTube from the early 70’s, it’s like the Stone Age, strategy-wise. It’s funny when reading forums at HOF selection time, few have any knowledge how good Ken Riley was. a big part of that is his stats just don’t translate to todays game. so why is he competing against Revis and other DB’s for a HOF spot.

https://profootballresearchers.com/ Is a site that may better answer your questions .
 
I'm kind of whiney I read that and you showed no results 😊

I didn't see you mentioning two way players and that will dramatically impact your value algorithms.

The game was very different and that's a big reason why people don't go past 1960. Aside from the obvious, college was often considered better. Pro players didn't get paid much and it's not easy to work another job and be a dad, tend to stuff at home etc while you're all bruised up.
George Clooney (believe it or not) has some fantastic stories to tell and it's probably worth googling to listen. They called concussions punch drunk and male bravado...you were well respected for operating heavy machinery while punch drunk. 🤣 He had a story of a guy being traded in game and back after the game. Some debates if casts are legal- not playing with a broken arm as a debate but if the cast should be allowed.

Anyways yeah the pay stunk and life was too busy to get hurt or sore so often and the college game was sincerely better.
 
Bri, what results were you looking for when you said that?

And I mentioned two way players in the original post, you would have to go back and read it. travdogg already told me two-way players should probably be given extra credit as well, but currently I don't know how I would do that.

Did you mean to say go before 1960? Because it's in the name of my post. If the college game was better, then shouldn't the great players from college be able to succeed in the NFL or not because of how some teams are or the way they end up playing?

If you're trying to tell me this is unneccessary, I'm fine with that, but I'm responding to you to clear up some confusion you and I have and so you can answer the results part.
 
I just ran across this thread and wanted to comment that both AV and HOF Monitor are flawed metrics. I have posted reasons in this forum before, so if you are interested, you can find those posts by searching my user name.

I don't say that to be critical of those who invested their effort into creating those metrics, they are fine general proxy metrics. But anyone using them should be aware of the flaws.
 
Just Win Baby, I think I've seen your reasons before, there might not be an end-all be-all to something like what AV is for, and if you say that it's not accurate or good enough, I'm fine with that, and I wouldn't try to do what I've asked about before. I don't know how you would be able to determine what players who played before 1960 would really do well or bad from what I'd do, as I've seen before that you don't know about some older players that well while others you do, which I can't complain against, but if it's not so important to you, you don't need to answer the question if you don't want to. If you want to know about some of my results, I can share them with you as well.
 
Just Win Baby, I think I've seen your reasons before, there might not be an end-all be-all to something like what AV is for, and if you say that it's not accurate or good enough, I'm fine with that, and I wouldn't try to do what I've asked about before. I don't know how you would be able to determine what players who played before 1960 would really do well or bad from what I'd do, as I've seen before that you don't know about some older players that well while others you do, which I can't complain against, but if it's not so important to you, you don't need to answer the question if you don't want to. If you want to know about some of my results, I can share them with you as well.
I would be interested
 
I'm only going to list the players with at least 117 AV or 91 Weighted AV that I've done so far, as those would put them in the top 250 which shows up on Pro Football Reference currently, and I have them in my own list for those reasons. Other players you'd want to know about you would have to ask me about.

My first 2 players, Y.A. Tittle and Bobby Layne, had 156 AV/112 Weighted and 155 AV/115 Weighted, but Y.A. Tittle's numbers include the AAFC. The three other guys I've done so far because of other reasons to show up in the top 250 were Rosey Brown (138/103), Lenny Moore (131/107), and Raymond Berry (121/94).
 
Did you mean to say go before 1960? Because it's in the name of my post. If the college game was better, then shouldn't the great players from college be able to succeed in the NFL or not because of how some teams are or the way they end up playing?
They didn't want to. Didn't pay well. Very rough or violent. They had their day in college, time to move on.
There was simply no carrot to entice them.

Eisenhower was a football player in college and you can see pics of him and his bruises and all. He talked of football lots when he was running for office. You might Google those speeches. Some are quoted by famous NFL coaches like the one about brotherhood.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top