Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
So you're back to a single game instead of the 'increased sample size' argument now?
He had a good AYA last week. Smith had a great AYA the two prior weeks and was attacking downfield again this week until his brains were turned to eggs. But really, AYA isn't going to tell you much in a single game because 1 play can really skew it. AYA doesn't give you a good snapshot but it does give you a very good trend. Over large enough numbers, a few dropped passes (or hail mary's that Tyreke Hill and blown coverage bails you out on) even out.
The trends show them to be roughly even in how they attack downfield. And when you look at the actual single game process rather than results (i.e. examine the true depth of target on those throws), you get a very similar outcome.
Foles is extremely unlikely to have any discernible impact on the running game at all.
|
Here's my viewpoint on this. You can certainly call it cherry picking, but it's my opinion on the topic of Foles. His play in STL was the outlier. That Oline was terrible and the team was terrible on the offensive side of the ball. Gurley had to put up a herculean performance after contact to accomplish what he did.
And like I said in my first response, this goes beyond just Nick Foles. It's the larger discussion about Smith. Teams aren't threatened by his deep ball. And the Chiefs fans around here want to see more deep throws, not because "fantasy football" but because of the belief that it will open up
all of the short game,
not just the running game. If you disagree, that's fine. It doesn't change the fact that the people that respond with "hurr durr fantasy football" or think it's just about sexy plays are completely missing the point, probably intentionally.