Twenty-Four Eighty-Four
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
WR Andy Isabella, BAL (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bojang0301
- Start date
Interseptopus
Footballguy
cloppbeast
Footballguy
This whole thing is really confusing to me. They've been using no names and signing washed up guys to play instead of Isabella. Either he's not very good or Kinsbury is pretty dumb.
I agree, at least give him a chance to show what he can do. They must not like what they have seen so far with lack of playing time he has gotten.
johnnyboy8102
Footballguy
Mark Football
Footballguy
They don't have the O line to do anything else right now. Murray can't stand in there and take hits. He's miniature.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Or he got hurt and was behind... he hurt his knee and then after that was "a work in progress"
Your dislike of Isabella is well documented in this thread. I'm not surprised you would give these two very incorrect options, when option C is the correct one
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Nucker101
Footballguy
I've seen this posted a few times by different people on forums/twitter and have been confused by this "unleashing" that is supposedly about to happen this year.
As a Kyler Murray owner in a couple of redraft leagues, including my dynasty league, I have to ask.....What the hell are they waiting for?
To me it's pretty simple, their o-line is the big issue. Kyler doesn't get enough help from them to throw enough deep bombs. I would love to be wrong, but other than being due for some positive TD regression in the redzone, I'm not expecting some "unleashing" here
Last edited by a moderator:
Milkman
Footballguy
Nucker101
Footballguy
I hope so, but I'm thinking it is what it is at this point due to that crap o-line. But again, they're 100% due for some positive redzone regression so just by default they should produce bigger fantasy days from here on out.
Milkman
Footballguy
On pace for
4284 passing
452 rushing
And close to 20 total TDs........
This is the first 4 games of his career and a tough schedule to start.....with him running below EV on TDs.
Nucker101
Footballguy
Milkman
Footballguy
Right so if that happens.......he's golden. Plus an uptick in yards could easily happen too......
Cincy, Atl, NYG up next.........
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The bump is coming from an article sayin Isabella is still a backup even after all the injuries at WR
Snorkelson
Footballguy
TartanLion
Footballguy
Holding tight on this one in dynasty, not every rookie WR just goes straight in and starts putting up points
saintfool
Dead sexy
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Positive regression is real. Regression in statistical terms doesn’t mean getting worse.
Snorkelson
Footballguy
Been awhile since I’ve had statistics. But now that you point it out it makes sense, regression to the mean can go both ways.
kutta
Footballguy
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Positive regression to me would mean the same as positive correlation, the regression line has positive slope; as the x increases so does the y. 'Positive regression' to the mean seems to be invented by fantasy football. A google search of the phrase shows the top 3 results are FF stuff. "Positive" or "negative" to differentiate whether the variable increases or decreases towards the average, I've never heard of it.
Back to the subject, Arizona is an interesting regression case. They're on pace to break the record for plays ran, 70% of them pass attempts. Kyler has 6.3 ypa and a TD percentage of 2.37%. So there's extreme volume and extreme efficiency (or lack thereof).
Back to the subject, Arizona is an interesting regression case. They're on pace to break the record for plays ran, 70% of them pass attempts. Kyler has 6.3 ypa and a TD percentage of 2.37%. So there's extreme volume and extreme efficiency (or lack thereof).
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope. A “regression line” is not the same thing as “regression to the mean,” which is very much a thing.
Regression to the mean refers to the tendency over repeated instances for the sample average to approach the population average. It arises from the fact that outcomes very far above or below the mean are unlikely, making it more likely that the next outcome lies in the direction of the mean.
You won’t find a lot of hits for “positive regression to the mean” because statisticians understand regression can go both ways, It’s only when the term started creeping into fantasy football that this became an issue. Early analysts focused on regression in the context of “last year’s breakout star is unlikely to repeat” and not on “this guy underperformed and is due for a breakout,” so people for whom the term was new decided it meant “going backward.” (Quite reasonable since in other contexts “regress” is to move one way and “progress” is to move the other.)
The concept of “positive regression” has been people attempting to correct this misconception by pointing out instances of the other side of the concept of regression to the mean in FF.
Signed,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Statistics Teacher
Biabreakable
Footballguy
It is poor phrasing to say regression to the mean when you are talking about the direction of movement of the variable increasing.
Whether statisticians know what they mean by this or not. Its poor communication of the idea because you could just say progression toward the mean in this case as a more accurate descriptor.
Isabella has no stats to regress or progress to. I presume this is referring to the entire offense being below what is expected on average for TD thrown per attempt and so on not matching up.
Well this offense is different than the alagamation of passing stats from 32 different teams and QBs.
Rookie QB. Rookie head coach. I wouldnt be thinking in these sorts of terms in regards to this offense right now.
Whether statisticians know what they mean by this or not. Its poor communication of the idea because you could just say progression toward the mean in this case as a more accurate descriptor.
Isabella has no stats to regress or progress to. I presume this is referring to the entire offense being below what is expected on average for TD thrown per attempt and so on not matching up.
Well this offense is different than the alagamation of passing stats from 32 different teams and QBs.
Rookie QB. Rookie head coach. I wouldnt be thinking in these sorts of terms in regards to this offense right now.
Well, aside from the fact that you would be coining the phrase "progression to the mean" which has no meaning in statistics, whereas regression to the mean has been around for over a century.
But by all means make you your own terminology rather than teaching the masses to use the words we already have properly. It seems to be the way of things.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Yeah why would we try to say things correctly? Even though "regression to the mean" is deep seeded in statistical history, these phrases seem one in the same. Especially when people just dont understand, ignorance is always the better method. Casing point, no one here really seemed to realize what regression to the mean meant, but everyone can understand what progression to the mean implies. If you think we can help increase the understanding of these topics and awareness of proper terms, you've got another thing coming.
I know you're being funny, but to follow up on my actual point: this isn't correct. No one understood "progression to the mean." It was invented because of misunderstanding regression, and has had to be repeatedly explained for it to take hold as a fantasy football concept.
The correct view is to see the mean as the normal state, and the outlier as being movement away from it. Calling it "returning to the mean" would have the same meaning as "regression," and perhaps more clearly explain why regression is a valid word. It is regression (backward movement) in the sense of going back toward the mean, which is the default state.
Progression would imply something changing over time, whereas the presumption here is that there is a mean, and that each "season" is a random variation off of that mean, and not a trend "progressing" in any particular direction,
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I agree
I was being facetious. I dont know why people make up terms or use incorrect terms. happens far too often. As a medical professional, seeing medical terms and theories thrown around that are flat out incorrect makes me shake my head. I get grief when I point out the error. Hope you are more fortunate
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Biabreakable
Footballguy
All words and phrases are made up and agreed upon. Some times only because of hubris or because that's the way it's been for a long time. Language is continually evolving. Including phrases for this term in the specialized field of statistics.Arodin said:
A more informative answer for the use of regression or return for this idea is that it is based on deductive reasoning.
What we are talking about is movement of a value towards the point of origin which is the mean and describing the direction of that movement. The process of doing so is deductive, so perhaps using the word progress interferes with understanding that?
U of Texas added the top RB, arguably the top HS player-Gatorade player of the year, and his coach has been subbing him in at slot and not letting him play RB. He said he's going to change the position and revolutionize the game. I don't know about all that, but it does look different. He takes hits, gives hits, and it's different, but is he wrecking that kid's future? Or is he helping with the dime a dozen RB culture of the NFL?
Why bring this up?
Kingsbury was asked about this before he said Isabella is playing outside. Then he said David Johnson and Chase Edmunds will be in the slot.
I don't think the full story is presented here so I just wanted to pass this along.
My opinion- Kingsbury would totally try and lead a trend and this absolutely suits his ego. I still think it's wiser to play a WR at slot and for FF guys to plan on it. Maybe Fitz is inside? I'm gonna throw some DFS $ at Edmunds and Johnson but otherwise, I'll have to believe it when I see it
Why bring this up?
Kingsbury was asked about this before he said Isabella is playing outside. Then he said David Johnson and Chase Edmunds will be in the slot.
I don't think the full story is presented here so I just wanted to pass this along.
My opinion- Kingsbury would totally try and lead a trend and this absolutely suits his ego. I still think it's wiser to play a WR at slot and for FF guys to plan on it. Maybe Fitz is inside? I'm gonna throw some DFS $ at Edmunds and Johnson but otherwise, I'll have to believe it when I see it
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Week 5 snaps and utilization for AZ WR
L.Fitzgerald 57 snaps (74%)8 targets 6 receptions 58 yards
K.Johnson 73 snaps (95%) 1 rushing attempt 3 yards 7 targets 3 receptions 22 yards
T.Sherfield 59 snaps (77%) 3 targets 1 reception 23 yards
P.Cooper 18 snaps (23%) 1 target 1 reception 5 yards
A.Isabella 10 snaps (13%) 2 rushing attempts 11 yards
The Cardinals played two TE for over 50% of the snaps. Charles Clay had one reception for 27 yards.
He didn't get any targets but at least they did get the ball in his hands despite playing the fewest snaps of the WR.
I guess I need to learn who Sherfield is and why he is playing so much.
L.Fitzgerald 57 snaps (74%)8 targets 6 receptions 58 yards
K.Johnson 73 snaps (95%) 1 rushing attempt 3 yards 7 targets 3 receptions 22 yards
T.Sherfield 59 snaps (77%) 3 targets 1 reception 23 yards
P.Cooper 18 snaps (23%) 1 target 1 reception 5 yards
A.Isabella 10 snaps (13%) 2 rushing attempts 11 yards
The Cardinals played two TE for over 50% of the snaps. Charles Clay had one reception for 27 yards.
He didn't get any targets but at least they did get the ball in his hands despite playing the fewest snaps of the WR.
I guess I need to learn who Sherfield is and why he is playing so much.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Btw Matthew Barry used the phrase progression to the mean on his show earlier today.
And all statisticians cringed in horror over nothing I suppose.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
for redraft sure. for dynasty the guy is in a great spot for 2020. They keep moving him around because he is so versatile. It is slowing his progression, but once Fitz retires and that wr group shakes out a bit more, Isabella is primed for a big 2nd and 3rd year.
saintfool
Dead sexy
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Yup.
I guess Sherfield was with the team last season and even made some plays late n the year when I was not paying any attention to them.
I didn't find out much else before I got bored. Maybe a Cardinals fan could tell us more about him?
Young 8
Footballguy
az_prof
Footballguy
Mark Football
Footballguy
He's good on special teams. He probably doesn't make most teams in the nfl. He's a below average receiving talent.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I'd be lying if I said I wasnt a little disappointed in his progression so far, but I dont see it as a death sentence. I mean look at Michael Gallup last year compared to this year. I see a similar path to starting.
I dont expect wrs to break out their rookie season. For some owners the sky is falling if their rookie isn't an immediate success. great opportunity to buy. This offense, when it is finally clicking, will have so much volume there's going to easily be more than 1 relevant wr
Boone22
Footballguy
What’s alarming to me is that Isabella is a WR with an X factor in speed that the Cards could use right now. Yet as others have said, he’s seemingly about their 7th WR option. I’d be less concerned if he was a more well rounded WR prospect and was taking time to adjust to the speed of the game, and not getting thrown to the Wolves because of that. But I fully expected Isabella to be a guy that gets plenty of snaps simply to stress the defense. But the only thing he’s stressing is his dynasty owners. He can still develop, but I’m extremely concerned.
