Here comes trouble! This week we've decided to rate another "random" Madden player along the lines of a real, tangible and consistent rating system and determine an accurate rating for him. This week? Reggie Bush of the Miami Dolphins.
Its been an interesting year for Reggie Bush to say the least. He's finally gotten the opportunity to be a #1 RB. While he's playing on a bad team, he's had some nice production on the heels of the short-winning streak his team enjoyed. And as a matter of fact, he recently rushed for over 200 yards in a game (a WIN) against the Bills. while the Bills are a bad team as well, and certainly NOT a defense of note, from a production standpoint 200 yards is impressive. Still, an accurate rating must be generated that factors in his current level of play, if its helping his team (or simply empty numbers that aren't affecting the most important stats of all: WINS) and looks at his last three years with the most emphasis on his current season.
Bush's three year numbers
The first thing we notice looking at the numbers is that Bush has never rushed for 1000 yard in a season in 6 years. NOT GOOD. Our stat minimums prevent a RB or WR from exceeding a 76 rating if they've never achieved this. Why? Its simple really, 1000 yards is a benchmark that isn't difficult for players that can be considered "good" (we consider Good to be 80-84) a Good player has shown a level of consistency--someone who has never had 1,000yds receiving or rushing has not. We don't care what the highlights tell you."He's never had the opportunity!" some will say. Looking at his limited attempts its obvious he wasn't a full-time back, but thats why we love production. It doesn't play favorites or care what you did at USC or how electrifying you are in the open field. Production, which are all stats are: Production in Numerical Form, looks at how many yards or other measurables you can produce in an NFL game. Production doesn't give you credit for something that isn't there based on lack of opportunities--and neither should stats. The proof is in the pudding. Bush got his chances THIS YEAR and he's barely at 1,000 yards with 2 games to go. What many (including us) would consider a solid but not good season. 1,000 yards in a season is 66 yards per game. Not Hall of Fame stuff. There's also the issue that his team has struggled and he hasn't made his team any better. Elite players do that even if its simply by the attention they draw balancing the field and creating opportunities for others (i.e a RB forcing a defense to put 8 or 9 in the box and letting a QB and WR work against man coverage)
In the end, Bush is having solid season, but never having rushed for 1,000 yards hurts him. So we'll rate him in the 70-74 "average NFL starter" range. His production really doesn't dictate anything else. We decided on a mid-point. So 72 sounds about right to us. What do you rate him and why?
great breakdown!
ReplyDeletereally like this breakdown. never realized he was so average.
ReplyDeleteWith that sparkling logic, Landry Fields (797 points) should have a higher rating than Richard Hamilton (777).
ReplyDeleteReggie Bush averages 5.0 yards per rush which is 9th in the league.
Bush's 973 rushing yards is 12th in the NFL, despite only being 19th in attempts.
If he is the average NFL starter there must be a lot who suck.
tried to find anyway to rate bush higher than a 75, but cant find anything to do so. numbers say 70, talent says 80. i even looked at his return game number, but outside of the 4 punt returns, all his kick and punt return numbers are below average. Rating for Reggie Bush - 70 Justud
ReplyDeleteDO TELL. 12th? impressive. So what did you rate him Rashidi?
ReplyDeletelatest roster just came out. he's an 82 :)
ReplyDeletemay want to stick to basketball. average at best. Average is too misleading. Low attempts can also mean the staff doesn't trust you to be effective. He's averaged 500 yds per season so maybe he should be a 90, right? he is fast after all.
ReplyDeleteI don't have Madden and have no idea what any of the ratings are. If all stats are "Production in numerical form" then my point still stands.
ReplyDeletePlayers cannot control how often plays are called for them or how good their teammates are.
Brandon Jacobs
2009: 835 yards in 224 attempts
2010: 823 yards in 147 attempts
In no way shape or form are these similar seasons, and this is BASIC statistical analysis we are talking about. At the very least PER GAME rather than PER SEASON should be the starting benchmark of a good player.
I may not know football as well as I do basketball but I certainly know that the same basic fundamental concepts apply to editing ratings for both.
"I don't have Madden and have no idea what any of the ratings are." duh, conversation probably ends there then, genius.
ReplyDeletesuch a skilled rater as yourself shouldnt need the game to generate a rating, should he? its pretty simple. rate him on a scale of 1-99 based on his production.
ReplyDeletewe agree, sort of. while the overall production is essentially the same. BJ's 2010 could have been a better year based on team success and a number of other factors. a team scout who watched all the games and could generate an accurate rating would tell us. we don't blindly subscribe to the "per game effectiveness" for the simple reason that an injury could have been the reason for less carries--if that''s the case then the inability to stay healthy factors into the rating a great deal.
play-calls and teammates are irrelevant. the playing field will never be totally level. someone will always have a better qb, more dominant line or better defense, you play the hand you're dealt. these are also the subjective things that a rater can never really know. we like to keep our dependence on opinions to a minimum. rely on data, its much more accurate.
The reliance on your cumulative "stat minimums" begins crossing the line from arbitrary and misleading stat analysis to flat out ignorance of the way the game is being played now here. The feature back mentality is on a downswing and more teams are going with runningback by committee. Whether you're willing to acknowledge this reality is up to you.
ReplyDelete"66 yards per game. Not Hall of Fame stuff."
IT MATTERS HOW MANY TIMES HE HAD TO RUN THE BALL TO GET THOSE YARDS. Here are your top-5 backs by yardage this season, plus Reggie:
1. MJD: 1437
2. McCoy: 1309
3. Foster: 1224
4. Gore: 1202
5. Rice: 1173
...
9. Bush: 1086
Here are those same backs' attempts and yards/carry:
MJD: 318 / 4.5
McCoy: 273 / 4.8
Foster: 278 / 4.4
Gore: 275 / 4.4
Rice: 267 / 4.4
Bush: 216 / 5.0
5 yards/carry puts Bush in the neighborhood of other CRAPPY, UNIMPRESSIVE halfbacks like Matt Forte, Ryan Mathews and LeSean McCoy. The other RBs in the league with more ypc are all stuck around 170 carries because they got hurt- Murray, McFadden, Taylor - or are sample-size victims like Spiller, Ben Tate and DeAngelo Williams.
Bottom line, it's weird how your reliance on data is so myopic. Not only ignoring anything but the topline yardage totals, but heaping scorn on anyone who suggests that it might be better to pick up +20% more yardage/carry than the average back. (3.9-4.1 is average) There's nothing accurate about ignoring 5.0 yards/carry because 216 touches works out to barely under 1,100 yards.
"we agree, sort of. while the overall production is essentially the same..."
NO. When you get the same number of yards with 65% the carries of the previous year, that is not "essentially the same" production. That is producing the same output at a drastically higher rate. Since we have a basketball guy here- Kobe Bryant getting 20 points on 10 shots is not the same level of production as getting 20 points on 20 shots. I hope I don't need to spell out why.
"BJ's 2010 could have been a better year based on team success and a number of other factors."
When the cumulative stats show what you want, declare that "stats don't lie." When the rate stats show an inconvenient truth - like a guy getting the same yardage on 1/3 fewer carries - wave your hands around about how hard it is to know what really caused it.
"you play the hand you're dealt"
Uhh, he did. Dude. You're sitting here waxing philosophical about "the hand you're dealt," "play-calls and teammates are irrelevant," and so forth, and you're completely oblivious to the fact that you're talking about a guy with all-pro numbers because he doesn't have 2 or 300 more rushing yards. The thought process in this place is nuts- it's like Donny started a blog to criticize his own work. You guys are too much.
"Players cannot control how often plays are called for them or how good their teammates are."
"Players cannot control how often plays are called for them or how good their teammates are."
"Players cannot control how often plays are called for them or how good their teammates are."
Write this out, over and over, like Bart Simpson on a chalkboard. Stare at it. Assimilate it. Learn from it. You're making damned fools of yourselves at the moment.
GASP! silence your tongue! its heresy you utter! "CRAPPY, UNIMPRESSIVE halfbacks like Matt Forte, Ryan Mathews and LeSean McCoy." sigh..we stopped reading right there.
ReplyDeleteForte and Mccoy are productive backs by any criteria you use. asking anyone to evaluate them is really an idiot test. only a fool would call them crappy and unimpressive.