Tau837
Footballguy
I applaud their effort to come up with a formulaic HOF Monitor metric. I wish they laid out the formula, but I only found this description: Introducing the PFR HOF Monitor. But IMO it is too flawed to use as a proxy without delving into specifics on a case by case basis.Anarchy99 said:PFR recently came out with a HOF evaluation tool. LINK
Most fundamentally, there are issues with Approximate Value, which is foundational to the HOF Monitor metric. Here is a series of articles about AV at PFR. From those articles:
- Assumption #1: the offensive line is exactly as good as the offense. This is obviously flawed, and Doug Drinen, AV creator admits it.
- Assumption #2: the offensive line is equally important in the running game as it is in the passing game. Drinen admitted this may be flawed, but he wasn't convinced of that.
- Assumption #3: the ratio of pass-thrower importance to pass-catcher importance is constant from team to team. This is obviously flawed, and Drinen admitted this.
- Team AV points is based on points per drive scored/allowed. Several issues:
All Pro and Pro Bowl selections are already used for OL and defensive players to generate AV... but not for offensive skill players. So they are seemingly double counted for OL and defensive players in the HOF Monitor formula.
- Points are mostly based on yards, ignoring receptions, TDs, first downs, sacks taken, and offensive turnovers. This results in situations like this one for the 2018 Chargers:
Mike Williams - rushing: 7/28/1 with 2 first downs; receiving: 66 targets, 43/664/10 with 42 first downs; 0 fumbles = 6 AV
- Tyrell Williams - rushing: 2/15/0 with 1 first down; receiving: 65 targets, 41/653/5 with 34 first downs; 2 fumbles = 6 AV
[*]Credit for efficiency is limited. For example, runners only get an adjustment (up or down) for YPC if they have 200+ carries in a season.
[*]Drinen basically admits that he doesn't know how to positionally divide up OL or defensive credit, which is not surprising since that is a complex problem. But his answer is to assign fixed positional values. So a tackle gets 20% more credit than a guard or center and 2/3 of defensive points go to the front 7 and 1/3 to the secondary. These choices are fine for generalizing positional value but could vary for individual situations.
[*]I can't find any evidence that AV accounts for postseason games.
I get that AV is an approximation tool, and that's fine. Just saying that it has flaws. That, in turn, means the HOF Monitor metric is flawed.