Redskins trade for Jason Taylor (updated)

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This was basically the point of my post. Sabermetrics is relatively useless in football because nobody's been able to do any of the things I mentioned.

i understand that, but when you go from saying there's a probability that brady would win you five more games to stating it as a fact that's annoying some i think.

those stats aren't proven, and while it is useful, they're not definitive, it's just probabilities vs average (and generally, it's average production, not average talent)... the actual game scorers that provide their basic data feed are NOT accounted for either among other things (ie, philly's scorers tend to count passes throw directly out of bounds as PDs for the nearest defender, but most scorers don't do that).

because most of the work doesn't factor out all that much (it's better than nothing, but on a scale of 1 to 10, it might be a 3 or 4) so quoting it as definitive or fact is really pretty misleading.

*the team stats are actually pretty decent, it's just the individual stats and finding specific answers based off vague input data that's not great.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'd be interested to hear what kind of analysis you're doing to strip out the covariances involved with the multiple variables driving team performance. That's the big reason sabermetrics has not caught on in football. With baseball, you can normalize your data set rather easily because in the end, it largely boils down to a pitcher vs hitter matchup, with a few variables like day vs night, score, and situation to adjust for. But in football, the QB's performance depend's upon the line's ability to block the defense, the WRs' ability to get open, the effectiveness of the running game, the score, the quarter, etcetera. It's hard enough to quantify some of these variables, and even harder to mathematically formulate the covariance quotients to effectively tease them out and normalize your data. Have you done anything on this front?

The other big issue is sample size: one football game provides about two weeks of equivalent data in baseball.

To an extent, you have to leave the team oriented variables in there often. One of the biggest allies of statistical analysis in football is roster turnover: parts come and go, and production changes accordingly, so over multiple years, you can see which positions and players are more valuable, and exactly what the numbers are showing.

As far as the normalizing of the data, I'm not really working on the frontlines there. There are people out there who are much better than I am working with correlations and statistical significance, and that type of work (such as FO's DVOA metric or Doug Drinen's Approximate Value metric).

A lot of the work I do is simply taking the results that other systems churn out, and trying to work through team and coaching variables to better translate those numbers into wins and losses. Basically, I'm best when working with the statistical defenses of roster moves (or lack thereof).

Like I said earlier, my current project is trying to find out how many wins Jason Taylor adds over Phillip Daniels. Once I figure this out, I'll know just how long Jason Taylor has to play at a high level to be worth a second round draft pick.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm just a big believer in playing the guys you signed and brought in. If James is totally useless and isn't ready to play this year then why sign him in the first place? If they think Jackson has no ability except to be a camp scrub then why draft him? Can't Washington rush off the edge too? I don't believe in the quick fix because history shows it simply doesn't work. I believe in coaching up the guys you've got and going that route. Buges did it with Heyer last year. Wasn't Heyer a free agent??? Now going into this year Heyer has gained valuable experience and is a solid back-up with playing experience in case Jansen isn't effective. Why can't this new D-line coach do the same thing?

I think it's quite possible the new d-line coach is doing what Buges did with Heyer. He's got his starters, and he's got his projects. One might turn into a potential starter next year (like Heyer did), and there you go -- we developed the guys we brought in, and we also got JT to help get us there. Also, let's not lose sight of the value that JT provides to our younger d-linemen.

In the end, it's all about moderation -- develop some guys, and also get some guys that don't need development.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Those of you who think JT is too old to contribute in a BIG way are crazy. You don't just lose everything you had because you are one year (day) older. It happens slowly, and from what I've seen, JT has not yet begun to decline. I mean, look at Daniels -- the guy's 35, and not even worthy to stand in JT's shadow. Yet, he has been a great player for us -- for more than just one year -- and we got him in his 30's.

Just because a guy is over 30 doesn't mean squat. It means even less when you're talking about a future HoFer.

IMO, there is no more influential position on defense than DE. When you can add *one* guy, and receive a greatly improved defensive unit as a result, then you do it -- especially for a 2nd rounder. So, think of it this way: would you trade a 2nd rounder to make our entire defense better, and get a beast of a pass rusher in the process? Of course.

Also consider that JC won't have to score as many points, if our defense can limit opponents better than last year. That's invaluable.

If JT stays healthy, he makes our *entire* team better.

[MTK]

All I know is I haven't heard one analyst all day on ESPN or NFL Radio call the Taylor trade a bad move for either team. In fact several said gave the Redskins the slight edge in the deal.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Those of you who think JT is too old to contribute in a BIG way are crazy. You don't just lose everything you had because you are one year (day) older. It happens slowly, and from what I've seen, JT has not yet begun to decline. I mean, look at Daniels -- the guy's 35, and not even worthy to stand in JT's shadow. Yet, he has been a great player for us -- for more than just one year -- and we got him in his 30's.

Two things, although I largely agree with what you said that decline is a gradual process.

Some players really do fall off the face of the earth. Think Warren Sapp in 2007, or Curtis Martin in 2005. Sapp had a rejuvenated year in 2006, but was a shell of his former self this year. Martin hit the wall and was never effective again after leading the league in rushing in 2004.

The other thing is, we gave up something significant to get him, so even gradual decline could indicate that we got the short end of the stick. Sure, Taylor could absolutely take a backseat role after 2008, and provide some key pass rush off the bench, but we certainly didn't give up a 2nd so we could move him to the bench after a season.

Clearly we made an investment in Taylor and we need him to produce big time. But as you mentioned in your post, a pro bowl year is hardly out of the question.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Two things, although I largely agree with what you said that decline is a gradual process.

Some players really do fall off the face of the earth. Think Warren Sapp in 2007, or Curtis Martin in 2005. Sapp had a rejuvenated year in 2006, but was a shell of his former self this year. Martin hit the wall and was never effective again after leading the league in rushing in 2004.

The other thing is, we gave up something significant to get him, so even gradual decline could indicate that we got the short end of the stick. Sure, Taylor could absolutely take a backseat role after 2008, and provide some key pass rush off the bench, but we certainly didn't give up a 2nd so we could move him to the bench after a season.

Clearly we made an investment in Taylor and we need him to produce big time. But as you mentioned in your post, a pro bowl year is hardly out of the question.

I would say that Sapp's 2006 year was kind of exceptional. In the five years preceeding 2006, Sapp averaged 5.2 sacks. He got 10 in 2006, and 2 in 2007. So, I would say he gradually declined, and it started happening the last three years he was with Tampa. Oakland just somehow managed to get one last good year from him -- even after his decline.

As for Martin, he was injured in 2005, but he definitely wasn't playing well before that happened. Yeah, he pretty much fell off.

I think a lot has to do with the position as well. It seems more likely a RB will fall-off immediately, rather than a QB, safety, DE, etc.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I would say that Sapp's 2006 year was kind of exceptional. In the five years preceeding 2006, Sapp averaged 5.2 sacks. He got 10 in 2006, and 2 in 2007. So, I would say he gradually declined, and it started happening the last three years he was with Tampa. Oakland just somehow managed to get one last good year from him -- even after his decline.

That's a good point. Maybe the on field production masked a continual decline in physical skills.

Maybe it's possible that Taylor's skills are already declining, but if it is, I certainly can't find any statistical evidence of it.

[WaldSkins]

Even "if" JT is declining, he still is a better DE then what we just lost. If he even repeats his down year of 11 sacks in 2008 he will be the first player with that many on this team since 2000. He instantly draws the double rush off of carter for him to be more productive. You can't go by stats alone, he played for a 1-15 team, and he still achieved a double digit sack total. Im for a over 13 sack total this year because there is no way the line he played with last year was better then what he will have this year.

Press Conference @ 6pm TAYLOR PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY!

[Skinnette]

Originally Posted by Skinny Tee

I guess I'm pleased that it's not a 1st. Also JT is going to be better than Daniels so I can't complain much.

He's going to a great market if he wants major exposure before he starts his Hollywood career.

These "showy" types concern me because he could end up like Deion Sanders...all bling, no bang. Time will tell whether he's using us or not.

[MPNRedskins]

I feel this was a good trade for the Redskins. Taylor is a dominate player and our defensive will be that much better. Not taking anything away from Philip Daniels, but Taylor has the creds and he will be a force our "D". Welcome to the Redskins, Jason.

[skinsnut]

so...any of you know what we do with Buzbee and Daniels?
I figure the ideal situation is to cut both and not take up a roster space on IR.
What is the impact to the cap?
Can this be done?

I still say we need to sign a run stuffing end or a solid DT and absolutely still need an experienced OLB

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

so...any of you know what we do with Buzbee and Daniels?
I figure the ideal situation is to cut both and not take up a roster space on IR.
What is the impact to the cap?
Can this be done?

I still say we need to sign a run stuffing end or a solid DT and absolutely still need an experienced OLB

Buzbee has minimal effect, only $ 370K this year. Daniels is a larger number, about $ 2.7M in salary. Either way, I don't believe you can release a player who is injured until the off-season, or if you do you still are liable for their salary and cap #.

The cap/contract folks would need to confirm this.

[skinsnut]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Buzbee has minimal effect, only $ 370K this year. Daniels is a larger number, about $ 2.7M in salary. Either way, I don't believe you can release a player who is injured until the off-season, or if you do you still are liable for their salary and cap #.

The cap/contract folks would need to confirm this.

is schneed out there?
I smell injury settlements with release...only I don't know if we can afford it unless it is all salary

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Skinnette

These "showy" types concern me because he could end up like Deion Sanders...all bling, no bang. Time will tell whether he's using us or not.

Jason Taylor and Dieon Sanders are two very different people in my opinions. Taylor likes the limelight but he always seems to have a bit of humility. Sanders on the other hand will dance and talk at all times even if his team is loosing.