(04-12-2016, 08:54 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:We lost our QB, top TE, one of our top WRs, three starting OL, a RB TD vulture, most of our starting DL, a few key LBs, a starting safety, plus probably some guys I'm forgetting.
True overall, Stanford has lots of graduation losses (plus transfer).
As far as Connelly's stats go we lost 97% of our passing yards (correlation 0.264), lost 33% of our receiving yards (correlation 0.285), and 30% of our rushing yards (correlation 0.079). OL losses don't figure in at all because he found no correlation between returning OL and S&P numbers.
While those are significant losses, it's hard to believe only 8 teams of 128 lost as much or more. Makes me wonder if he actually did make the corrections with respect to Stanford listing players by academic standing rather than eligibility.
Equally surprising to me is that Connelly has Stanford with much more returning production on defense (61% vs 33%), despite big losses in his key stats of pass break ups (lose 45%, correlation 0.440), tackles (41%, correlation 0.388), sacks (lose 49%, correlation 0.194). I guess losing 97% of passing yards really dominates.
