Correlation and Causation are two different things

General talk about Dynasty Leagues.
ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 2:36 pm

I’m tired of hearing people use a player/coach’s past tendencies to dictate their future actions.

I’ve heard people say things like Bruce Arians doesn’t like TEs or Brady loves TEs but Rodgers doesn’t. Maybe it isn’t that they have a preference for a certain type of player but rather that they make the best with what’s available to them.

Anyone looking at how Brees plays today would think “Brees hates TEs,” yet in the early 2010s when he had Jimmy Graham, he targeting TEs more than any other position because Graham was an elite stud. The fact that Ben Watson doesn’t have 1,000 yards and 12 TDs this year doesn’t say anything about Brees’s preference for TEs, it says something about Watson’s talent level and the superior options Brees has in the passing game.

A few years ago, people always avoided NYG RBs because “NY is a bad place for RBs,” but maybe it was just the fact that they never had anyone like Saquon before.

Or last year, people were knocking McCaffrey because Newton doesn’t throw to RBs much. Well you wouldn’t either if your only options were JStew and Deangelo Williams.

These narratives are all one in the same and so short-sighted. The best QBs and coaches maximize the talent of those around them, they don’t just actively look for one position group and neglect all others regardless of talent.

bjd5211
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5615
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 11:50 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby bjd5211 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 2:39 pm

Cool

FantasyFreak
GOAT
GOAT
Posts: 27107
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 1:03 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby FantasyFreak » Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:57 pm

Brandin Cooks wasn't going to get 100 targets, and 1000 yards wasn't likely, because he was going to be filling the "Watkins role" of field stretcher/decoy in McVey's offense, remember. That one was my favourite in recent memory.
"You're a creep. You got caught.." -Dan Patrick

ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 4:41 pm

FantasyFreak wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:57 pm Brandin Cooks wasn't going to get 100 targets, and 1000 yards wasn't likely, because he was going to be filling the "Watkins role" of field stretcher/decoy in McVey's offense, remember. That one was my favourite in recent memory.
Lololol and Bruce Arians hates TEs because he never made Darren Fells a centerpiece of his Arizona offense.

Pullo Vision
Degenerate
Degenerate
Posts: 7557
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 11:53 pm

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby Pullo Vision » Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:15 pm

The flip side is Mike Martz not knowing what to do with Greg Olsen, being disappointed he didn't fit in his scheme and shipping Olsen to Carolina.
League #1- 14 tm ppr, 1Q, 2R, 3W, 1T, 1 R/W/T, 1K
1 DT, 2 DE, 2 LB, 1 CB, 1 S, 1 flex

League #2- 12 team PPR, 1Q, 1R, 2W, 1T, 1 R/W/T, 1 W/R/T, 1 Def

League #3- 12 tm PPR, 1Q, 0R (yes, ZERO RB) 3W, 1T, 2 R/W/T flex, 1 Def

ninotoreS
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:56 pm

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ninotoreS » Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:21 pm

Correlation indicates causation. The popular truism ("correlation isn't causation") reminds us that an indication isn't a guarantee.

Regardless, OP is just cherry-picking examples of false-positive correlation, and one can just as easily do the opposite.

If the OP's argument is that we should disregard historical correlations as we place our bets attempting to forecast the future, then that's dumb. Of course there are never guarantees, but historical correlation is more credible and a lot more useful for making predictions than, for example, egotistical wishful thinking.
Last edited by ninotoreS on Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure."
- Sun Tzu, 469 BCE

ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:23 pm

ninotoreS wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:21 pm Correlation indicates causation. The popular truism ("correlation isn't causation") reminds us that an indication isn't a guarantee.

Regardless, OP is just cherry-picking examples of false-positive correlation, and one can just as easily do the opposite.
What are some good examples of the opposite?
Last edited by ajf235 on Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:24 pm

Pullo Vision wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:15 pm The flip side is Mike Martz not knowing what to do with Greg Olsen, being disappointed he didn't fit in his scheme and shipping Olsen to Carolina.
Yeah agreed. Some coaches just don’t know how to use talented players but generally good coaches/QBs make the best use of their most talented players.

ninotoreS
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:56 pm

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ninotoreS » Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:41 pm

ajf235 wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:23 pm What are some good examples of the opposite?
Just off the top of my head:

- Kyle Shanahan RBs are effective almost regardless of talent/pedigree (dating back to Steve Slaton)
- Andy Reid practically manufactures fantasy RB1s (dating back to at least Westbrook)
- Brady's Pats consistently create underneath-heavy target-monsters (this year it was James White)
- Arians had a long history correlating with effective 5'10" - 6'0" WRs
- Peyton Manning greatly boosted his RBs' rushing success with his pre-snap reads and audibles

Lotta fantasy gold to be had over the years from observing these correlations, and swooping early on unheralded, cheaply acquired players that subsequently became very fantasy valuable for at least some interval of time.

Another hyper recent example is Newton and Norv Turner. Knowledgeable people were pointing out in preseason that if any OC could spike Newton's career-poor completion percentage, it would be Turner, who has a long history helping out his QBs in this area. And that is exactly the effect Turner had, as Newton posted the best percentage of his career by a wide margin. And very savvy people noted that correlate in connection with CMC, realizing he was a logical candidate for the efficient "lay-up" completions Turner's offenses are known for.

Trends are real, and they're always worth noting if you're trying to anticipate the future. Needless to say.

Of course there is no prognosticating cheat-code. But there are indicators. An intelligent dynasty manager will note them without putting too much faith into them.



edit: I somehow typoed "noting" as "nothing" in one of those last sentences, which completely altered the meaning :oops:
Last edited by ninotoreS on Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure."
- Sun Tzu, 469 BCE

ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:10 pm

ninotoreS wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:41 pm
ajf235 wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:23 pm What are some good examples of the opposite?
Just off the top of my head:

- Kyle Shanahan RBs are effective almost regardless of talent/pedigree (dating back to Steve Slaton)
- Andy Reid practically manufactures fantasy RB1s (dating back to at least Westbrook)
- Brady's Pats consistently create underneath-heavy target-monsters (this year it was James White)
- Arians had a long history correlating with effective 5'10" - 6'0" WRs
- Peyton Manning greatly boosted his RBs' rushing success with his pre-snap reads and audibles

Lotta fantasy gold to be had over the years from observing these correlations, and swooping early on unheralded, cheaply acquired players that subsequently became very fantasy valuable for at least some interval of time.

Another hyper recent example is Newton and Norv Turner. Knowledgeable people were pointing out in preseason that if any OC could spike Newton's career-poor completion percentage, it would be Turner, who has a long history helping out his QBs in this area. And that is exactly the effect Turner had, as Newton posted the best percentage of his career by a wide margin. And very savvy people noted that correlate in connection with CMC, realizing he was a logical candidate for the efficient "lay-up" completions Turner's offenses are known for.

Trends are real, and they're always worth nothing if you're trying to anticipate the future. Needless to say.

Of course there is no prognosticating cheat-code. But there are indicators. An intelligent dynasty manager will note them without putting too much faith into them.
Yeah I mean you’re absolutely right that trends are real and every example you gave is legit. But the informed fantasy footballer who studies trends should be able to pick out which trends are real and which ones have no basis because of either small sample size or lack of talented players to fill certain projected roles skewing certain data historically. I guess I’m just saying fantasy football requires reading through the lines. Just because there’s a trend it doesn’t mean that it’s going to continue. You really need to dig deep and analyze why certain trends are happening rather than just blindly pointing out that a certain coach or QB likes/dislikes certain positions without any analysis besides the stats of players at that position who played with the coach/QB in question.

But I agree with your point here. The only one I’m skeptical about is that Arians creates effective 5’10”-6’0” WRs but I haven’t studied that stat at all so idk.

User avatar
moishetreats
Legend
Legend
Posts: 6521
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:37 pm
Contact:

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby moishetreats » Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:29 pm

Here's a great video clip (90 seconds) from The West Wing that addresses OP's point. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL_vHDjG5Wk
10 tms 27 plrs PPR
Start: 2QB 2RB 3WR 2TE 2Flex / best ball

QB: Herbert, Love, Rodgers, G Smith, Stidham, T Taylor, Hall
RB: McCaffrey, Mixon, Pacheco, Montgomery, Z White, Allgeier, Dillon
WR: Hill, St. Brown, Kupp, Allen, Lockett, B Johnson
TE: Kelce, Kmet, Kraft, Okonkwo, Dulcich, Tremble

2024: 2.09, 3.07, 3.08, 3.10, 4.08
2025: 2nd (x2), 4th, 5th (x2)
2026: 1st, 2nd (x2), 3rd, 4th, 5th



12 tms 22 active plyrs. Salary Cap $300 PPR
Start: 1QB 2RB 3WR 1TE 1SF 1Flex / best ball

QB: Lawrence (contract through 2026), Love ('24), Rodgers ('24), Stidham ('25), Lock ('25)
RB: Bijan Robinson ('25), Pollard ('27), Dillon ('24), Rodriguez ('24), Spiller ('24)
WR: G Wilson ('26), AJ Brown ('26), DJ Montgomery ('25)
TE: --
2024 Cap Spent: $186

IR: --
TAXI SQUAD (4 max): --

ajf235
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Correlation and Causation are two different things

Postby ajf235 » Tue Jan 22, 2019 6:52 am

ninotoreS wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:21 pm Correlation indicates causation. The popular truism ("correlation isn't causation") reminds us that an indication isn't a guarantee.

Regardless, OP is just cherry-picking examples of false-positive correlation, and one can just as easily do the opposite.

If the OP's argument is that we should disregard historical correlations as we place our bets attempting to forecast the future, then that's dumb. Of course there are never guarantees, but historical correlation is more credible and a lot more useful for making predictions than, for example, egotistical wishful thinking.
That’s not at all what I’m saying. Im saying it’s pretty easy to see which trends matter and which don’t if you look closely. Both Mike (when he was in the league) and Kyle Shanahan churning out top 12 RBs every single year despite having a bunch of late Round Picks at RB is clearly correlated. Arians hating TEs cuz he didn’t make Darren Fells a centerpiece in Arizona is moronic. All I’m saying is people need to pay closer attention to every aspect of situation and not just the end result on the stat sheet when determining which trends matter and which don’t.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 81-, Anteaters, BabyChark23, Bing [Bot], brhurley, eNdblu, Shoreline Steamers, yinzername and 30 guests