Anyone here have experience with statistical hypothesis testing?

[1of10Charnatives]

I’ve got a question I wanna look at using hypothesis testing but although I had some exposure to it for my degree that was many moons ago and tbh my grade in business statistics reflected that it was one of the subjects I had the weakest grasp of any I studied. If anybody’s even decent at that stuff I could use a hand not screwing it up. Post here or pm me.

Oh and before you ask the question relates to running qb’s as they age, so not remotely relevant to the Panthers.

[uncfan888]

[1of10Charnatives]

Basically a lot of people tend to go with the assumption that when running qb’s stop running or run a lot less, they become less effective overall. When I looked at running qb’s career statistics, those that played long enough to make it into their 30’s did run markedly less from about 30 onward, but they were also able to keep playing into their mid 30’s. (a fact I found mildly  surprising and has caused me to reevaluate how viable I thought keeping Cam is as an option going forward.)

What I want look at beyond just eye balling numbers is whether the decrease in running impacted their passer rating negatively or not. I think it’s possible that as these qb’s matured, their experience enabled them to largely compensate for the need to shift away from running.

statistical hypothesis testing is a math based way to answer that question. A question that it might be useful to know about what it would be reasonable to expect from Cam going forward barring injury.

 

[Happy Panther]

I was just dangerous enough to help maybe 2 decades ago.

But I would start running some liner regressions and see what pops out.

[Wes21]

41 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Basically a lot of people tend to go with the assumption that when running qb’s stop running or run a lot less, they become less effective overall. When I looked at running qb’s career statistics, those that played long enough to make it into their 30’s did run markedly less from about 30 onward, but they were also able to keep playing into their mid 30’s. (a fact I found mildly  surprising and has caused me to reevaluate how viable I thought keeping Cam is as an option going forward.)

What I want look at beyond just eye balling numbers is whether the decrease in running impacted their passer rating negatively or not. I think it’s possible that as these qb’s matured, their experience enabled them to largely compensate for the need to shift away from running.

statistical hypothesis testing is a math based way to answer that question. A question that it might be useful to know about what it would be reasonable to expect from Cam going forward barring injury.

 

[1of10Charnatives]

4 minutes ago, Wes21 said:

We should expect Cam to run less from this point on based on other successful running qb’s. Math offers a way to determine whether we should expect that to make him less effective as a passer instead of just guessing.

[Tbe]

You’re not going to have enough data to get a statistically significant result.

[1of10Charnatives]

3 minutes ago, Tbe said:

You’re not going to have enough data to get a statistically significant result.

Do you remember how big a sample size is needed? I think there’s about 8 to 10 guys you could use as a sample, but I don’t recall what the necessary threshold for statistical significance would be.

[4Corners]

I do. I am probably a bit rusty since a most of my work does not involve this sort of detail. However, you have proved time and time again to disregard facts and have personally insulted me several times so I will not be offering you any help. Are you one of those dook fans who didn’t go to dook?

cheers! 

[Wes21]

29 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Do you remember how big a sample size is needed? I think there’s about 8 to 10 guys you could use as a sample, but I don’t recall what the necessary threshold for statistical significance would be.

But what's the criteria to judge a QB on?  Yards/TD/INTs?  Rating?  QBR?  Wins?  Completion %?  Some abstract efficiency rating from a statistics site?  How do we decide a guy is a "running QB" or not?  What's the criteria for that?

I think its trying to add math and science to something that just needs to be discussed with fluid criteria, simply taking it player by player.  Start with Russell Wilson...he's been more effective as a QB.  BUT, his Super Bowls came back when he was less effective and cost less.

 

[Tbe]

48 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Do you remember how big a sample size is needed? I think there’s about 8 to 10 guys you could use as a sample, but I don’t recall what the necessary threshold for statistical significance would be.

More than 8-10. You are looking at age and QBR I guess? At those low numbers one guy with a great or terrible record after 30 will have a major impact on the entire model. You need hundreds of QB’s to make it significant.

[4Corners]

58 minutes ago, Wes21 said:

But what's the criteria to judge a QB on?  Yards/TD/INTs?  Rating?  QBR?  Wins?  Completion %?  Some abstract efficiency rating from a statistics site?  How do we decide a guy is a "running QB" or not?  What's the criteria for that?

I think its trying to add math and science to something that just needs to be discussed with fluid criteria, simply taking it player by player.  Start with Russell Wilson...he's been more effective as a QB.  BUT, his Super Bowls came back when he was less effective and cost less.

 

Every thread bro - you say a lot, but you don’t really say anything at all. Bunch of words that don’t really mean anything. Bet you think you are super smart. 

[Shocker]

2 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

Every thread bro - you say a lot, but you don’t really say anything at all. Bunch of words that don’t really mean anything. Bet you think you are super smart. 

Cat meet Kettle.  LOL.  

[4Corners]

15 minutes ago, Shocker said:

Cat meet Kettle.  LOL.  

That is not the expression, Einstein.