Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen (/thread-13430.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen (/thread-13430.html)
Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - washingtonismoney - 01-30-2017
I think we've argued previously about whether Stanford truly is a laggard or not in terms of true freshmen playing. At least for this year, ProFootballFocus can settle the debate: Stanford was in the bottom ten of snaps from true freshmen.
(Here's the bottom ten: https://twitter.com/PFF_Vinnie/status/826211696935043073
Here's the top ten: https://twitter.com/PFF_Vinnie/status/826128515078746113)
Now, the other question I have is: to what degree does playing true freshmen equate to success? The bottom ten won games at a .659 clip, while the top ten won games at a .563 clip. Of course, Alabama is in the top ten most-snaps-played list, so you can certainly have success playing true freshmen -- but it seems it's easier to win keeping true freshmen off the field, in general.
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - CTcard - 01-30-2017
(01-30-2017, 09:43 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:I think we've argued previously about whether Stanford truly is a laggard or not in terms of true freshmen playing. At least for this year, ProFootballFocus can settle the debate: Stanford was in the bottom ten of snaps from true freshmen.
(Here's the bottom ten: https://twitter.com/PFF_Vinnie/status/826211696935043073
Here's the top ten: https://twitter.com/PFF_Vinnie/status/826128515078746113)
Now, the other question I have is: to what degree does playing true freshmen equate to success? The bottom ten won games at a .659 clip, while the top ten won games at a .563 clip. Of course, Alabama is in the top ten most-snaps-played list, so you can certainly have success playing true freshmen -- but it seems it's easier to win keeping true freshmen off the field, in general.
Another question I would have (beyond simply how accurate are these guys) is how typical a year this was for Stanford under Shaw?
From what I remember, only Herbig had a significant number of snaps, with a handful from each of Stewart, Robinson, McNitzky, ... and is that it?
Last year we would have had significant snaps from Irwin, Love, Meeks, Reid, Edwards, Branch, Bailey and anyone else I have forgotten. Seems like a lot more.Â
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - socalstanfan1 - 01-31-2017
I think Stanford will often ranked among the lowest in part because of the number of talented upper classmen who stay with the team. As our recruiting has improved, we do have more people leaving early for the NFL, but still most will stay for their senior years, and even fifth years, if eligible. Alabama puts more freshmen on the field in part because of their talent, but also in part because the previous group of blue-chip talent has left for the NFL. We also do not lose people due to legal or academic issues as some programs do.
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - FarmBoy - 01-31-2017
Another barrier is the lack of early enrollment. I wonder how a spring enrollment impacts snap count.
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - BostonCard - 01-31-2017
There are two reasons to play a lot of freshmen:
1) You have super talented freshmen (eg Alabama) and you know the players won't stay on the team for all four years, let alone five.
2) You have a bad team, and the upperclassmen just aren't really good enough to beat out the freshmen.
That produces the odd correlation you see.
BC
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - fullmetal - 01-31-2017
(01-31-2017, 04:02 AM)FarmBoy link Wrote:Another barrier is the lack of early enrollment. I wonder how a spring enrollment impacts snap count.
Really good point. Early enrolling freshmen gain a lot before their first season--characterizing them as "freshmen" is a slight misnomer.
Re: Stats on snaps played by true freshmen - washingtonismoney - 01-31-2017
(01-31-2017, 10:38 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:1) You have super talented freshmen (eg Alabama) and you know the players won't stay on the team for all four years, let alone five.
2) You have a bad team, and the upperclassmen just aren't really good enough to beat out the freshmen.
Tying these two points together -- as well as CTCard's about year-to-year variation -- it seems to me Stanford is (likely) uniquely predisposed to not playing freshmen:
1) It's consistently a good team, which means its freshmen have better players to beat out.
2) It consistently recruits best at OL and QB, the positions that generally require the most experience to excel in.
And then there are other various idiosyncratic factors. Like I suppose in an alternate universe Kaden Smith never tears his ACL and is a valuable third TE in 2016.