Mike Clay's roster talent evaluation all 32 teams ranked

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, MJS said:

Yeah, that's my suspicion. Just assigning a number based on his own opinions. So this is just worthless, if that's the case. Might as well be ranked by gold stars.

 

People try to turn their opinions into "data" by just assigning numbers.

 

Yep, that's my sense.

 

40 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

He’s paid for his expertise on football.

 

Using his judgement he set 4 as the best score and rated accordingly.

 

There is nothing new to see here. The Bills lean on Josh Allen to prop up relatively weak skill position talent. 

 

In other words, it's his subjective opinion that he's trying to quantify numerically, to make it appear empirical and data-driven.

 

11 or so years ago, our family was trying to make a decision on where to send our child to middle and high school.   I had us each write down our "gut impressions" of the schools and rank them in order best match to least match, entirely based on our subjective opinion.

 

This wasn't good enough for my spouse, a multi-degreed engineer.  Spouse came up with 6 categories on which we were each independently to rank each school numerically from 1 to 5, then sum the scores to produce an "objective, empirical" ranking.  I did my honest best.

 

Wanna hear the spoiler?  The numerical rankings we each came up with differed - but exactly matched our individual subjective ranks.  Huh.

 

I'm not trying to diss Mike Clay on his subjective opinion.  The opinion of a knowledgeable person is always worth hearing.  I just don't care for the modern trend for trying to add gravitas to opinions by digitizing them.

 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Beck Water

[PrimeTime101]

5 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

He uses a weighted average of the position rankings. If you apply the weights at the top of the chart to each position, the Eagles weighted average is 2.9 and the offense and defense grades (factoring in their proportion of the total grade) is a 2.0 and 0.9 respectively. I was able to easily recreate all of his offense/defense/total grades in a couple minutes in Excel.

even if you use Weighted Averages, the numbers still do not add up. they dont

[DCOrange]

Just now, PrimeTime101 said:

even if you use Weighted Averages, the numbers still do not add up. they dont

They do though; I literally recreated it myself.

 

Offense/Defense/Total:

• Eagles - 2.028 / 0.8925 / 2.9205
• Cowboys - 1.790 / 1.088 / 2.878
• Bills - 1.526 / 1.3035 / 2.8295
• Packers - 0.771 / 1.0725 / 1.8435

I can pull any other team you want but it all adds up. Not sure how familiar you are with Excel but it's very easy to set up.

[SoCal Deek]

Based on these rankings it looks like the Bills better be drafting OFFENSE in all seven rounds! 

[whorlnut]

7 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

They do though; I literally recreated it myself.

 

Offense/Defense/Total:

• Eagles - 2.028 / 0.8925 / 2.9205
• Cowboys - 1.790 / 1.088 / 2.878
• Bills - 1.526 / 1.3035 / 2.8295
• Packers - 0.771 / 1.0725 / 1.8435

I can pull any other team you want but it all adds up. Not sure how familiar you are with Excel but it's very easy to set up.

People don’t want to believe stats or metrics when they don’t align with their opinions or personal beliefs. 

[PrimeTime101]

9 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

They do though; I literally recreated it myself.

 

Offense/Defense/Total:

• Eagles - 2.028 / 0.8925 / 2.9205
• Cowboys - 1.790 / 1.088 / 2.878
• Bills - 1.526 / 1.3035 / 2.8295
• Packers - 0.771 / 1.0725 / 1.8435

I can pull any other team you want but it all adds up. Not sure how familiar you are with Excel but it's very easy to set up.

I am an open minded person that is beginning to get it. . My biggest issue is the Offensive positional ranking between Dallas and Cincinati where Cinci has much poorer numbers on offense compared to Dallas, yet they both have 1.8 ranks. can you explain that to me and maybe I will grasp it better. That being said I still believe some of these ranks on these teams are still broken. 

 

Help the old man out will ya? LOL 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

51 minutes ago, MJS said:

I didn't ask about his merit as an individual, I asked how he determined the numbers for each position.

 

Being an "expert" does not replace sound methodology.

Well you asked how he determined the numbers and that's how he did it. 

 

He wrote numbers down. 

 

The results aren't shocking. 

 

The Playoff teams from last year rank really high.

 

The teams we all perceive as bad are really low. 

 

 

[Charles Romes]

It looks like he cheated by looking at the final standing and then tweaking the data so the rankings would match the standings as well as popular opinion. 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Charles Romes

[Buffalo_Stampede]

33 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

He does statistical projections as well but I don't believe those have been released yet.

I’m saying I think his rankings are based on last years performance. He doesn’t use projections in these rankings.

Edited March 24, 2023 by Buffalo_Stampede

[SoCal Deek]

The most interesting Bills ranking has to be at WR and TE. Josh continues to pile up stats but apparently he’s throwing the ball to nobody. 

[Beck Water]

11 minutes ago, Charles Romes said:

It looks like he cheated by looking at the final standing and then tweaking the data so the rankings would match the standings as well as popular opinion. 

 

4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

I’m saying I think his rankings are based on last years performance. He doesn’t use projections in these rankings.

 

But the assertion is, he's basing the rankings upon the current roster at this point in FA and prior to the draft, correct?  (I'm not disagreeing with you, just clarifying my own understanding of what the rankings are supposed to represent)

 

 

[whorlnut]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

The most interesting Bills ranking has to be at WR and TE. Josh continues to pile up stats but apparently he’s throwing the ball to nobody. 

Not true. He’s got Diggs. The WR ranking illustrates exactly how bad the complimentary pieces are though. 

[blacklabel]

Oh yeah? Well on my scale, the patented Ween-o-Matic 5200 (upgrade over the 4900 model) it says that the Bills have a score of 646.29 wieners. This makes them the greatest roster in the league and it makes the guy who wrote the first scale a big ol' dumb dumb. 

[DCOrange]

18 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

I am an open minded person that is beginning to get it. . My biggest issue is the Offensive positional ranking between Dallas and Cincinati where Cinci has much poorer numbers on offense compared to Dallas, yet they both have 1.8 ranks. can you explain that to me and maybe I will grasp it better. That being said I still believe some of these ranks on these teams are still broken. 

 

Help the old man out will ya? LOL 

Nearly half the offense grade is determined by the QB where the Bengals are significantly higher than Dallas. It really just boils down to that.

[JerseyBills]

1 hour ago, Bleeding Bills Blue said:

Probably disagree on the WRs.  

 

Take the bills and broncos.

 

Bills are 1.6 and broncos are 2.6.  When does "where you were drafted" go out?  Jeudy is a 1st rounder, but i don't put him much ahead of Davis at all.  Diggs is head and shoulders above sutton.  Patrick is coming off an ACL, and Hamler is going to miss camp.  How are they better than sherfield, harty, and shakir?  

 

Bills and Browns 1.6 to 1.5.  Diggs is better than cooper.  Davis is better than peoples jones.  They just added elijah moore i guess?  I dunno, just feels like they don't weight diggs enough in these rankings. 

Ya our WR ranking is way too low . We got a top 5 WR and some legit weapons.

How are the Jests almost a point higher? Makes no sense

[Straight Hucklebuck]

24 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Yep, that's my sense.

 

 

In other words, it's his subjective opinion that he's trying to quantify numerically, to make it appear empirical and data-driven.

 

11 or so years ago, our family was trying to make a decision on where to send our child to middle and high school.   I had us each write down our "gut impressions" of the schools and rank them in order best match to least match, entirely based on our subjective opinion.

 

This wasn't good enough for my spouse, a multi-degreed engineer.  Spouse came up with 6 categories on which we were each independently to rank each school numerically from 1 to 5, then sum the scores to produce an "objective, empirical" ranking.  I did my honest best.

 

Wanna hear the spoiler?  The numerical rankings we each came up with differed - but exactly matched our individual subjective ranks.  Huh.

 

I'm not trying to diss Mike Clay on his subjective opinion.  The opinion of a knowledgeable person is always worth hearing.  I just don't care for the modern trend for trying to add gravitas to opinions by digitizing them.

 

 

It's Friday a month before the Draft starts. 

 

The first wave of FA is over. 

 

I don't think there is any agenda brewing here. 

 

The media still loves Rodgers and his MVPs carry a lot of weight with the media. 

 

But overall, I don't see the problem here. 

 

The Bills are right where they should be. Their skill personnel are weak compared to the better teams in this league. They have one real weapon - Diggs. Otherwise there are no proven high-end talents. 

 

And if anything, given no Edmunds, their linebacker score is generous propped up by Milano. 

[MJS]

24 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Well you asked how he determined the numbers and that's how he did it. 

 

He wrote numbers down. 

 

The results aren't shocking. 

 

The Playoff teams from last year rank really high.

 

The teams we all perceive as bad are really low. 

Sounds like you are just guessing. Do you actually know that he just wrote numbers down and that he didn't attempt any other analysis for that?

[GoBills808]

Nobody had more all pros last year than San Francisco 

[Beck Water]

6 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

It's Friday a month before the Draft starts. 

 

The first wave of FA is over. 

 

I don't think there is any agenda brewing here. 

 

The media still loves Rodgers and his MVPs carry a lot of weight with the media. 

 

But overall, I don't see the problem here. 

 

The Bills are right where they should be. Their skill personnel are weak compared to the better teams in this league. They have one real weapon - Diggs. Otherwise there are no proven high-end talents. 

 

And if anything, given no Edmunds, their linebacker score is generous propped up by Milano. 

 

I'm not saying there's an agenda, or a problem.  To the contrary - I'm pointing out that expert opinion is usually worthy of respect.

 

I am pointing out that digitizing a subjective opinion doesn't make it empirical

[ColoradoBills]

I've always put little stock in all these types of rankings.  

They're just a form of a recency bias, popularity contest more often than not.

 

I'd like to know where last year's LA Rams were ranked.