Can Elusiveness Be Measured?

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 11:00 AM PDT in 49ers Statistical Preview and Review

Pro Football Focus has a new stat they've created that they've called Elusiveness. It's always been tough to measure how much of a running back's success is due to his offensive line and how much to his own innate abilities. Football Outsiders uses DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement) which is a way of measuring how good a running back is compared to his replacement. DYAR explained. They also use DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average), and EY (Effective Yards). All of these stats attempt to measure how effective a running back is.

Here is how Football Outsiders explains Effective Yards:

Effective Yards, listed in red, translate DVOA into a yards per attempt figure. This provides an easy comparison: in general, players with more Effective Yards than standard yards played better than standard stats would otherwise indicate, while players with fewer Effective Yards than standard yards played worse than standard stats would otherwise indicate. Effective Yards are not the best way to measure total value because they are more dependent on usage than DYAR.

What I want to do is compare Pro Football's new stat with Football Outsiders rankings and then compare that with the NFL's more normal stat-keeping to see how much difference there is between the three. Join me after the jump for some fun stat-crunching.

Elusiveness (as defined by PFF) is combined of three important statistics. The first is the number of yards after initial contact, the second is the ratio of missed tackles (whether after the catch or after the run). Here are some rankings and then the formula.

Top 10, percentage of yards after contact

Name	Team	Att.	Yds.	YCo	YCo%	YCo/Att.
Brian Leonard	CIN	27	84	69	82.14	2.6
Chris Brown	HOU	79	267	207	77.53	2.6
Larry Johnson	KC	132	380	294	77.37	2.2
Marshawn Lynch	BUF	120	450	339	77.37	2.2
Jason Snelling	ATL	134	571	422	73.91	2.8
Mewelde Moore	PIT	35	118	86	72.88	2.5
Michael Bush	OAK	123	591	423	71.57	3.4
Tim Hightower	ARI	143	597	426	71.36	2.9
Clinton Portis	WAS	124	502	357	71.12	2.9

Bottom five, percentage of yards after contact

Name	Team	Att.	Yds.	YCo	YCo%	YCo/Att.
Tashard Choice	DAL	64	349	124	35.53	1.9
Reggie Bush	NO	70	396	146	36.87	2.1
Brian Westbrook	PHI	61	274	126	45.99	2.1
Correll Buckhalter	DEN	120	642	314	48.91	2.6
Thomas Jones	NYJ	332	1,402	701	50.00	2.1

Rather interesting to see Thomas Jones' name at the bottom of the list--gives a whole new level of insight into why the Jets let him go.

Top 10, missed tackles/reception ratio

Player	Team	Rec.	Rec.MT	MT/Rec. rating
Beanie Wells	ARI	12	5	50.00
Jamal Lewis	CLE	8	3	50.00
Pierre Thomas	NO	39	16	43.59
Ahmad Bradshaw	NYG	21	8	42.86
Tashard Choice	DAL	15	5	40.00
Mewelde Moore	PIT	21	7	38.10
Correll Buckhalter	DEN	31	10	35.48
Fred Jackson	BUF	46	15	34.78
DeAngelo Williams	CAR	29	9	34.48
Ray Rice	BAL	78	25	33.33

There are some interesting names there--it's surprising to me to see Beanie Wells so high on the list. One thing I can glean from this is that some of these running backs had poor offensive lines which is why the may have struggled in 2009.

The formula devised by PFF is this: (MTrush+MTrec)/(Rec+Att)*(YCo/Att*100)

Here are the rankings. We have one 49er making the list and not in a good way.

Top 10, Elusive Rating

Name	Team	Att.	Yds.	YCo	YCo/Att.	MT	Rec.	Rec. MT	Elusive Rating
Justin Forsett	SEA	114	623	363	3.2	23	41	11	70.19
Johnathan Stewart	CAR	221	1,133	740	3.3	44	18	5	67.66
Pierre Thomas	NO	147	793	445	3	19	39	16	56.45
Fred Jackson	BUF	238	1,067	708	3	38	46	15	55.99
Ronnie Brown	MIA	147	648	444	3	28	14	1	54.04
Ray Rice	BAL	254	1,338	719	2.8	33	78	25	48.92
Ahmad Bradshaw	NYG	163	777	480	2.9	23	21	8	48.86
Michael Turner	ATL	178	875	594	3.3	27	6	0	48.69
Adrian L. Peterson	MIN	315	1,394	915	2.9	50	43	10	48.60
Jamaal Charles	KC	190	1,120	687	3.6	28	40	3	48.52

Bottom 10, Elusive Rating

Name	Team	Att.	Yds.	YCo	YCo/Att.	MT	Rec.	Rec. MT	Elusive Rating
Chester Taylor	MIN	93	332	203	2.2	2	44	3	8.03
Derrick Ward	TB	115	414	256	2.2	4	20	1	8.15
Thomas Jones	NYJ	332	1,402	701	2.1	14	10	0	8.60
LaDanian Tomlinson	SD	223	733	425	1.9	9	20	2	8.60
Brandon Jackson	GB	37	112	70	1.9	0	21	3	9.83
Larry Johnson	KC	132	380	294	2.2	5	12	2	10.69
Glen Coffee	SF	83	226	184	2.2	4	11	1	11.70
Brian Westbrook	PHI	61	274	126	2.1	4	25	1	12.21
Mike Bell	NO	172	653	386	2.2	10	4	0	12.50
Jerious Norwood	ATL	76	254	158	2.1	4	19	2	13.26

I'm actually not surprised by this at all. We knew Coffee wasn't very good, and despite the well-documented woes of the offensive line Coffee barely did half as well as Gore.

Gore's Elusive rating is 20.17 which would put him in the bottom half of the league, and I agree with that. Gore isn't the most elusive back--what he has is a quick burst out of the line of scrimmage, but he doesn't make people miss often.

Football Outsiders ranks the top 15 running backs thusly:

1. Chris Johnson
2. Ryan Grant
3. Ray Rice
4. Jamaal Charles
5. Pierre Thomas
6. Steven Jackson
7. Jonathan Stewart
8. Ricky Williams
9. DeAngelo Williams
10. Marion Barber
11. Maurice Jones-Drew
12. Adrian Peterson
13. Joseph Addai
14. Cedric Benson
15. Ronnie Brown
20. Frank Gore

They also put Gore in the bottom half of starting RBs.

Based on total rushing yards here are the rankings from NFL.com

1. Chris Johnson
2. Steven Jackson
3. Thomas Jones
4. Maurice Jones-Drew
5. Adrian Peterson
6. Ray Rice
7. Ryan Grant
8. Cedric Benson
9. Jonathan Stewart
10. Ricky Williams
11. Jamaal Charles
11. Frank Gore

So, once that's all said and done where does that leave us? I think that the traditional rankings based purely on yards and TDs can be misleading (see Jones, Thomas for a good example), but they're not necessarily that far off the mark. They tend to not give a complete picture though.

I also find it interesting that though PFF and Football Outsiders take different approaches to it they tend to arrive at pretty close to the same destination.

Update: Sam Monson of PFF (the original author of the piece), has kindly replied to a few questions I had about his methodology. One of the things he did to provide a ratio when there were zero missed tackles is to add one to everybody's missed tackle ratio. The formula for the MT/Rec. Rating is:

[(MT+1)/Receptions]*100. Thus Beanie Wells 12 receptions and 5 missed tackles looks like this:

[(5+1)/12]*100=50.0

Also, for anyone interested, the complete spreadsheet is in the PFF forums in this post. You have to be a PFF member in order to download the file.

Poll

How many yards will Frank Gore have in 2010?

More than 1500

101 votes

1250-1500

385 votes

1000-1250

210 votes

Less than 1000

20 votes

716 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 38 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'm inclined to think it's a load of crap.

Not a reputable or identifiable rating at all, and just another gimmick for the site to use. While you can look at it and see some broad generalizations that make sense, overall I just don’t see it. Yes, we already knew Coffee and Gore aren’t particularly elusive but there’s still some names on there that… ya know.

And then God created Saturn... and he liked it, so he put a ring on it.
Twitter me and what not.

by James Brady on Jul 7, 2010 11:24 AM PDT reply actions

I dunno man... when I saw Glen Coffee at the bottom of the elusive list

I knew they had to be onto something.

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Jul 7, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions

What that something is...

Is that Anthony Dixon should win that backup job by the end of camp. We can bring Coffee in as 3rd down pass protector. At least he can block.

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Jul 7, 2010 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't think that it's a complete load

I just think they need to do quite a bit of work on it to refine it. It’s interesting for a different perspective on running back performance compared to the standard stats of yards and yards per carry.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree

like you mentioned with Jones, maybe there was more to what that O-line did than the way he ran. Sure, he probably read the holes well, made some great cuts, and was able to carry a load, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he did that well in open space. So while the Jets may have been right to let Jones go in that sense, signing LT to replace him just ruined it.

by ZeroOneInfinity on Jul 7, 2010 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm surprised Chris Johnson did not make the list of most elusive

However, he did have a good number of negative yard run plays. I guess I would like to know how they evaluate something like say Johnson not necessarily making a move to break a tackle, but merely cutting a different direction to avoid the tackle or even contact.

It’s also funny to see Larry Johnson in the top 10 for yards after contact but in the bottom 10 for elusiveness.

by ZeroOneInfinity on Jul 7, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions

Johnson's elusivness

was affected by the number of touches he had. Counting runs and receptions he touched the ball 408 times last year.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions

these stats

dont mean much to me….they arent really legit…

but that picture should say:

“Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Naaaaa, you can’t catch meee! "

A man's life is described either by his actions, words, or even the people who he loves and loves him.

by imjuliooo89 on Jul 7, 2010 11:30 AM PDT reply actions

I have a feeling

That they may be onto something, but just the begnning. It needs to be worked with a lot, just to have the outcomes make a little more sense for me.

-Brett Gleason
-Daily Evergreen Staff Sports Writer

by Brett the 49er on Jul 7, 2010 12:15 PM PDT reply actions

Yeah that's kind of what I think too

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions

totally ridiculous to include cases of guys with like 20 receptions, not to mention guys with <40 carries.

When this .sig was awaiting the Final Sabean Apocalypse, I never once in a million years suspected it would be a "good" Apocalypse. Bengie... Don't let the door hit you IN YOUR GIANT ASS on the way out!
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game totally stalled and basically dead at this point

by zenbitz on Jul 7, 2010 12:32 PM PDT reply actions

Actually ProFootballFocus gives you the ability to change the number of snaps

So if you want to see a list of guys who were in 50% of the team’s snaps, you can do that.

by ZeroOneInfinity on Jul 7, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions

Nobody questions Madden11's toughness or swagger ratings!

Coach Boone: And who's team is this, Gary? Is this your team? Or is this your daddy's team?
Bertier: Yours.
Coach Boone: Now get on the bus. Put on your jacket first and then get on the bus.

by Amigo on Jul 7, 2010 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions

They should though!

If Amigo has less than 98 swagger I know they are not paying attention.

by ZeroOneInfinity on Jul 7, 2010 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions

Meh, another pointless stat

Was Larry Csonka “elusive”? Was Earl Campbell “elusive”?

And if Barry Sanders or Gale Sayers isn’t the highest scoring back in history at this stat, then it really doesn’t measure what they say it measures.

by ToddCommish on Jul 7, 2010 1:33 PM PDT reply actions

Is this poll based on total yards or just rushing yards?

I’m not quite sure I care just how elusive Frank Gore is rated. After watching him since he entered the league I know one thing: Gore is productive. You can look at all the stats and determine whatever conclusion you want, but the truth is, Frank Gore is productive. That’s the only thing RBs need to be.

by Andrew Davidson on Jul 7, 2010 1:36 PM PDT reply actions

Agree

You do need to look at the O-line though in most cases to properly judge the RB.

by jobharve on Jul 7, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Missed Tackle Ratio

Beanie Wells had 12 receptions and Jamal Lewis had 8 receptions. They are the top 2 on the chart, don’t know if that includes tackles as well and it just got left out or if they are saying that 5 missed tackles for Wells and 3 for Lewis is equal to a .5 MT/Rec ratio? If the later is the case then they should probably not be put on the list for small sample size and the people who made the chart need to go back to math class to learn that 5/12 and 3/8 is not a .5 ratio.

by jobharve on Jul 7, 2010 3:20 PM PDT reply actions

Yeah there's something funky with those ratios

I’ll email the author and ask for clarification.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions

They're all wrong on the high side

I suspect they don’t count receptions where there wasn’t a tackle attempt (i.e. running out of bounds, easy TD).

Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.

-randolphforpresident

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 7, 2010 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions

That might be it.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions

This is exactly it. I emailed Sam Monson (the original author) asking him about this

He said that he added +1 to everybody’s missed tackles to help account for those who had 0 missed tackles (can’t have a ratio if one of the divisors is 0).

There’s also a full spreadsheet available in their forums with all running backs listed. You have to be a member of the forums to download it though.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/forum/showthread.php?t=244

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 9, 2010 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions

Michael Turner must be up there

Because we sure couldn’t tackle him last year. HA!

Coach Boone: And who's team is this, Gary? Is this your team? Or is this your daddy's team?
Bertier: Yours.
Coach Boone: Now get on the bus. Put on your jacket first and then get on the bus.

by Amigo on Jul 7, 2010 3:41 PM PDT reply actions

Justin Forsett ranks highly

not surprising given our inability to tackle him.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions

It's funny looking at the MT count

Because you can remember some of the games where they racked an absurd amount of missed tackles.

Coach Boone: And who's team is this, Gary? Is this your team? Or is this your daddy's team?
Bertier: Yours.
Coach Boone: Now get on the bus. Put on your jacket first and then get on the bus.

by Amigo on Jul 7, 2010 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions

I know it's ridiculously early to predict

But Jahvid Best is going to be on the top of that list next year.

Coach Boone: And who's team is this, Gary? Is this your team? Or is this your daddy's team?
Bertier: Yours.
Coach Boone: Now get on the bus. Put on your jacket first and then get on the bus.

by Amigo on Jul 7, 2010 3:44 PM PDT reply actions

I hope so...

Because if he isn’t its because he got creamed by somebody and left another game with a head injury.

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Jul 8, 2010 2:34 AM PDT up reply actions

This still seems to give weight to a good offensive line

The yards after first contact is a good stat to look at, sure. But how soon after does the second contact come? Is it like Coffee, where the second defender is right behind the first, because our line was really bad? Or is it yards after, where the running back only had to beat one defender, he got hit but went past him, and had no one nearby thanks to good blocking?

Also known to haunt as theghostoftravisdenker and theaccidentalghostofsergioromo.
Adopted parent of good old Wendell, he tries so hard. You'll get a hit someday son!

by theghostofjasonellison on Jul 7, 2010 4:06 PM PDT reply actions

Eh

Gore still far out performed Coffee with the same miserable offensive line

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions

I’m not a big fan of Coffee, and I think he should be ranked really low here. I was just trying to point out a possible flaw, and further how dang hard it is to really, truly, objectively measure stuff like this.

Also known to haunt as theghostoftravisdenker and theaccidentalghostofsergioromo.
Adopted parent of good old Wendell, he tries so hard. You'll get a hit someday son!

by theghostofjasonellison on Jul 7, 2010 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions

The yards after first contact is a good stat to look at, sure. But how soon after does the second contact come?

Right. Is that contact with 1 guy? 2 guys? 11 guys bearing down on you? If you break that tackle, are the rest of the defenders ready to pounce on you or are they pancaked?

And you know what? What about a guy who out runs a bad angle? Does that count as a “missed tackle” even though he’s diving at the shoestrings as Chris Johnson glides by? Cuz that’s basically the same thing as a missed tackle… but waaaaayyyy more effective.

Also, when you think of “elusiveness” you think of quickness, shiftyness, “make ’em miss.” But that’s really only one type of missed tackle. Whatever, it’s an attempt to measure something, but it’s certainly not remotely useful now. Maybe they’ll refine it to where it can reasonably measure something useful.

Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.

-randolphforpresident

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 7, 2010 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions

On a similar note

What about Gore’s 2 runs against Seattle last year. I don’t think he got touched on either one… and really, there weren’t many, if any missed tackles. He just ran by everyone? Does that mean that 159 of Gore’s 1120 yards, or 14% count against him, or not count at all? And I think he was pretty damn elusive sneaking through those 8/9 man fronts.

by Sebaz49 on Jul 7, 2010 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsAsCBr2Gxc

by CorneliusJ on Jul 7, 2010 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions

No

I don’t think it can be measured.

All this time, I thought Gore was one of the more elusive running backs in the league, and then PFF says he’s not. Clearly, they don’t watch the games that 49er fans watch.

Rewind back (Youtube it) to all the big runs that Gore has had throughout his career and you’ll see that he has a great ability to make guys miss (in spite of his average speed). I guess PFF doesn’t see the shimmy shake that Gore puts on his defenders.

Put it this way: Gore has average speed, right? And yet, he’s able to make guys miss in the open field on a regular basis (again, youtube his highlights). Now that’s what I call elusiveness. Someone tell those PFF people that according to several English dictionaries, elusive means TO BE CLEVERLY OR SKILLFULLY EVASIVE. Gore is a clever runner, and someone who is extremely nifty with his feet (which is a skill) when provided with sufficient blocking.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWOFjiOPlXA&feature=related
Notice the first hard cut that Gore took in front of the referree. Granted, the ref helped him out, but he nevertheless used the ref effectively by baiting his run to the right and then cutting hard to the left. For true 49er fans, you would know that that’s a skill that Gore has possessed all his career, and that’s what you call elusiveness.

As Ninjames said, the PFF and all other so-called measures that they use are a load of crap.

by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Jul 7, 2010 6:45 PM PDT reply actions

Gore's different

he doesn’t make players miss. What he does is have a quick burst through the line and then he’s ahead of guys. It’s a different kind of elusiveness than PFF is after.

Their stats would put Gore with about a 20 rating (I had to do the math myself), which puts in the bottom half of running backs in elusiveness which I think is about right.

He’s more about the power than the shifty.

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority

by smileyman on Jul 7, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Why aren't we ranking these guys by yards per carry?

Frank Gore averages 4.8 yards per rush, that has to be at least top ten of current RB’s. I guess we are crediting the offensive line everyone keeps complaining about?

by Pat Willie on Jul 7, 2010 6:58 PM PDT reply actions

Last season....

Gore was tied for 13th in YPC at 4.9.

Active career wise? He’s 9th at 4.8 YPC.

"Lord, beer me strength."

by TexansDC on Jul 7, 2010 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions

Thanks DC

I figured active career he would be top ten. I’m surprised so many backs are over 4.8. Gore was over 5.4 YPC in 2006 which is pretty amazing. Maybe we’ll see that again this year. Maybe a long shot though because RB’s seem to age faster than most positions.

by Pat Willie on Jul 7, 2010 11:49 PM PDT reply actions