oldmanfan

That's the thing I've tried to emphasize here. In any judgment of accuracy, you have to define what you consider accurate vs. not. Again accuracy is defined as how close a value is to a given value, or using the dartboard explanation - how close your dart throw comes to the bulls eye. Not whether you hit the bulls eye, but how close. Two people could have different definitions, for example one could say anything within the triple score ring, some might say it has to be just a hair off the bulls eye. The latter is more a measure of precision, the ability to hit a specific spot repeatedly. Measuring how accurate a throw with an NFL QB is more complex than a dartboard in that you don't really know what the QBs true target is when he throws the ball and because the target is not stationary. The latter brings into the equation how a receiver ran his route. So when reading different accounts of whether a guy is accurate or not you have to take those things into account, and you have to define your terms. Transplant does it as catchable vs. not. I think his is too broad for accuracy measurement (when I did this for the last couple games I used catch radius as best as I could tell from film) but the key is that transplant used the same grading system for several different QBs. That would tend to decrease bias. It would still be best to have a second observer repeat the measures using his same criteria to see if there is agreement, but I give the guy credit for doing a lot of work. The differences he gets with other published stuff is likely due to different definitions of accuracy. I have tried to explain the difference might also be - Confusion of what accuracy is vs. precision and I think when some say Allen is inaccurate they really mean he is imprecise. Some point to dictionary definitions using the two words as synonyms, but when looking at things through a statistical glass that is simply wrong, as shown by the classic dartboard example. Precision is hitting the same spot with a pass consistently. So one can be very precise throwing a football, but if you consistently throw it two feet below where you're aiming you're precise but not accurate. And you don't have much of an NFL future. Conversely if you throw the ball where it's on the border of a guy's catch radius all the time, you're accurate but not really precise, and the issue there comes down to whether you give a receiver the ability to make a catch vs. make a catch in a position where you can make significant YAC. And again you may not have a bright NFL future. What you really want in your QB is both high accuracy and high precision. When announcers talk about putting a ball where only a receiver could cart him it, or about fitting a ball into a tight window, that's really being both very accurate and precise. If you want to equate the terms fine, but the only way to really do that is to restrict your definition of accuracy down to such a narrow window that you're really measuring precision. I think Allen needs to be more precise overall, and on shorter throws he needs more of both.

Some folks lose their spouse after years of marriage and they just can't handle it, and react in weird ways.

Not a bad idea.

Would be an upgrade. I see Beane using FAs to upgrade positions with solid guys, and look for his stars in the draft.

Well, you are of course wrong as shown by the dartboard analogy, which is throwing an object at a target, just as is throwing a football. But your ego won't allow you to admit that so you can wallow in ignorance, I suppose.

My advice is to get over yourself

The Bills? Hyde, Poyer, White, Edmunds, Milano, Hauschka, Allen, McCoy. The Sabres? Eichel, Skinner, Daboll, Reinhardt, Mittlestad (young guy getting there) Of course both teams are trying to improve. They each have young GMs and young HCs that are putting their stamps on their teams. They have an owner who made some questionable choices early on but now seems to get that you have to give your maagementvteams some time, that continuity is important. We all want success, we can all be critical at times. But your slamming them, and the folks that support them, as you do is completely over the top. I'll root for my hometown teams if it's all the same to you. I'll proudly wear my stuff anywhere, anytime. You don't want to fine. But don't insult those who do.

Who the hell do you think you are, daring to say that no one cares about those AFL championships? I got news for you son, there are many of us around who sat in the Rockpile and cheered for those teams and remember to this day those teams. Your arrogance is nauseating. Andre Reed is a HOF WR. Brown isn't yet and we'll see if he is. Your statement was that both teams are "devoid of talent" and you now don't have the guts to stand up for your own words.

Andre Reed is in the HOF but Brown would be our best receiver ever? You claim we've never won anything and ignore the AFL championships which many of us here celebrated. You claim neither the Bills nor Sabres have any talent and ignore guys like Tradavious and Eichel just to name a couple. You also lump every team together as if they have never had changes in management and coaching. They have been in a prolonged dry spell, true. That is to me when the true fan hangs in there. Can one be critical and still do that? Yes. You however take it way farther than that.

Show me their definition of on and off target. The article you cite says nothing about that.

He wasn't for Allen. Why for Rosen?

You always decide not to bother anymore when you're shown to be wrong. Your ego doesn't allow you to admit it and actually learn something. You did the same thing back on the old BBMB; when proven wrong all you can do is throw childish insults. It is amazing that some here refuse to see the difference between accuracy and precision in throwing a football, when the classic definition of such is throwing darts at a dart board. The same concepts. For a guy to win a dart board contest he has to be both accurate AND precise. So do QBs if they want to be great. They have to consistently put the football right on the spot where a receiver can catch the ball, away from where a defender if on him, in a position where the receiver can not only catch the ball but where he can continue making the play. Perhaps you've hear of the phrase "fitting the ball into a tight window"? That is being not only accurate but very precise, and the greats are both. A guy like Brees can put it on a dime every time. Allen? If you chart his passes, and use a definition of catch radius like I do (and I looked closely at his last 3-4 games), he's accurate. The ball over 80% of the time was in that radius. But he needs to be more precise, needs to put it consistently on a given spot where the receiver can make the catch and keep going. And he needs to be better at both with the short passes, as I have said previously. Now, if one wants to use a very narrow definition of accurate as, say, it has to hit a guy right between the numbers? Then the definition of accurate and precision overlap. But that would be defining accuracy incorrectly. Kind of like a good old boy like Bradshaw would do.

So what you are saying is that you are ignorant of what accuracy vs. precision means. Hope the next time you go to get your blood pressure checked they don't mix the two up. Or if they do then we might not have to read your pedantic nonsense every time you're shown to be wrong about something. The OP defined his measure of accuracy. I note you haven't, other than to ridicule his. Because presuambly you like others have no clue what it means. I would define as within the catch radius; but then you would have t ask Allen if he threw it right where he wanted and if the WR ran a bad route. As for it not applying to football, strange that the classic way to describe the difference is by the dartboard analogy, I.e. Throwing a projectile at a specific spot. Sounds like what a forward pass is, doesn't it?

Here are the problems with your take that the OP, I and others have addressed repeatedly and that you seemingly choose to ignore: 1. You confuse passer ratings with accuracy; they are not the same thing. 2. You don't define accuracy, whereas the OP does in his exhaustive research of not only Allen but many other young QBs. 3. You likely confuse accuracy and precision 4. You show no data to support your own claim, other than rankings that do not really test accuracy.

Couple feet forward of that and Rosen might not be here today - scary stuff.

The coach and GM felt the players that were her when they got here were not the guys that could eventually win. So they got rid of them. Some I agree with, such as Dareus - how anyone can disagree that getting rid of a big tub of goo that did not want to play hard and was pulling down top dollar is beyond me. Some I did not agree with and still don't - prime example being Watkins although the money he's now getting to be an essential 3rd or 4th option in KC's offense is mind numbing. But this is what coaches and GM's do - when they are interviewed for these jobs they have ideas and plans for how they want to build a championship team, and then once hired execute their plan. McD and Beane have a clear idea of what they want in a team. They want guys dedicated to the game, and that will give maximum effort toward that goal. In that respect it is similar to Belichick's model - just do your job. They have started to put pieces together, they have the young QBs for both sides of the ball in Allen and Edmunds, some nice parts on defense, and they have work to do on the offensive side. They will use this offseason to address those. How successfully, we'll see. So they now have cleared away cap space as well as guys they didn't want, and their job now is to show they can get the guys they want, and to coach them in a way that leads to success. Whether they do so or not will dictate whether they are viewed as heroes in WNY, or whether they are bounced out a couple years from now. That's the way the NFL and really any professional (and for that matter college) team works.

Seems to me I've seen or read many articles indicating O line play has declined because guys come into the league with limited blocking skills given the advocacy of spread offenses in college. The Colts chose very well last draft and got two guys ready to play; the exception to prove the rule. I am quite sure Beane and McD understand the importance of an effective O line for their young QB. It will be interesting to see how they address it, but I have no doubt it will be addressed.

You can google anyone of a number of sites that will tell you they are not the same. Here's one just as an example: https://www.mathsisfun.com/accuracy-precision. Statistically accuracy is how close a value is to a given value, precision is how close different measured values are to each other. They are very different, especially in lab setting (I run one, so I know) and other scientific fields. let's say our blood pressure is really 200 systolic, but your at home pressure indicators consistently says it's 120. Very precise, but horribly inaccurate. Or you take ten measures that range from 180-220, but the mean is around 200. Horribly imprecise, but pretty accurate. Confusing accuracy and precision in medicine can get you killed. Now, take it to football. What transplantbillsfan says is actually correct, in that he has taken a measure of accuracy (i.e. catchable vs. not) and applied it not only to Allen but many other young QBs in another thread. And he is as accurate as any. I did the same with his last couple games. Now, if you want to define accuracy as, say, only hitting a guy right between the two numbers on his uniform, then you are using an extremely narrow interpretation of accurate, so much so that it would then equal precision, in that he has to hit a very specific spot time after time. In looking at the value of accuracy vs. precision in QB play, it comes down to things like fitting a ball into a tight window, or putting it exactly where a WR can make a play but a CB right on him can't. That involves both great accuracy AND great precision, as the dartboard analogy above shows. The great QBs are both accurate AND precise. Allen is pretty accurate as transplant has shown; he needs to e more precise on his ball placement. And to be fair, more accurate on certain throws like his short ones to the flat. Your posting Wikipedia definitions of accuracy and precision show you have not really ever worked in a field where an understanding of them are both mandatory and critical.

Accuracy and precision are very much different and you claiming they the same does not make it so.

If you go back and read, you'll find the PFF measures are ill defined.

I believe there are some who formed a conclusion about Allen when drafted, that he would not be good. And they then want to either twist data to meet their bias or ignore data that does not correspond. Basically confirmation bias. Why? Unfortunately so they can boast and say I told you so in a chat room. Everyone should understand by nowAllen has positives but also things to work on. They should also agree he is not nearly a finished product. And for the love of God we should all agree at long last that accuracy is not completion percentage. Completion percentage will involve more timely reading of defenses, taking shorter routes, better receiving/catching. And yes precise delivery of passes.

People said the same thing kind of stuff about Poyer, just as an example. And he turned out OK. I think they will do what they have done in FA the past couple years, look for middle tier guys that they think have upside, and not go for the big dollar guys. From reading up on the guy, he appears to be more of a road grader type as opposed to a more mobile guy that can pull, etc. I wonder if that tells us anything about what they're going to be looking for at other O line spots, and whether it tells us something about what Daboll wants to run, etc. Teller is the same the guy if he keeps his LG spot. I'm not as up on O line techniques as many here; would guys like this favor more of a zone vs/ man on man blocking scheme, and what might that say about the offensive scheme? I would think they would then wants RBs that are the one cut, hit the hole and go types, or to put it another way the anti-Shady?

Bravo!

Well said Shaw

Well said Shaw