The only 2 stats that matter in golf?
- Thread starter self-mastery
- Start date
- Status
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
The only stats that matter:
256 yards let up on kickoff returns
1 missed extra point
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrggggh!!!!!!!!!! Pitt!!!
As soon as I get emotionally invested.............
256 yards let up on kickoff returns
1 missed extra point
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrggggh!!!!!!!!!! Pitt!!!
As soon as I get emotionally invested.............
Top 10 2009 PGA Tour GIR:
1 1 John Senden 100 70.89 1,276 1,800 -0.26
2 2 Jonathan Byrd 89 70.59 1,080 1,530 -0.29
3 3 Joe Durant 62 70.58 686 972 -0.24
4 4 Robert Garrigus 83 70.53 1,003 1,422 -0.26
5 5 Jay Williamson 69 70.49 774 1,098 -0.19
6 6 Greg Owen 97 70.41 1,128 1,602 -0.24
7 7 D.J. Trahan 96 70.37 1,216 1,728 -0.26
8 8 Jason Bohn 88 69.63 1,103 1,584 -0.26
9 9 Chad Campbell 90 69.19 1,071 1,548 -0.25
T10 T10 Briny Baird 89 68.95 1,055 1,530 -0.24
T10 T10 Tom Lehman
And the great news is Jay Williamson is parlaying his GIR prowress into a Q-school lead. And Joe Durant is always near the lead here. Good check-casher. Shoots his handicap consistently.
Ok, enough of being a smart-ass. Obviously GIR is nice. Being at the top of that stat just doesn't tell you much about top tour players.
Putt for the dough.
By the way, the stats do show you how much Brad Faxon is a true outlier. Last in GIR and wayyyyy below the median or average numbers and near the top in putting. It's amazing to be able stay on the Tour for so long hitting so many fewer greens-in-regulation. And imagine being able to stay on Tour and shoot under par scores on Tour courses hitting half the greens in regulation when some players hit more than two-thirds in regulation. Unbelievable short game.
1 1 John Senden 100 70.89 1,276 1,800 -0.26
2 2 Jonathan Byrd 89 70.59 1,080 1,530 -0.29
3 3 Joe Durant 62 70.58 686 972 -0.24
4 4 Robert Garrigus 83 70.53 1,003 1,422 -0.26
5 5 Jay Williamson 69 70.49 774 1,098 -0.19
6 6 Greg Owen 97 70.41 1,128 1,602 -0.24
7 7 D.J. Trahan 96 70.37 1,216 1,728 -0.26
8 8 Jason Bohn 88 69.63 1,103 1,584 -0.26
9 9 Chad Campbell 90 69.19 1,071 1,548 -0.25
T10 T10 Briny Baird 89 68.95 1,055 1,530 -0.24
T10 T10 Tom Lehman
And the great news is Jay Williamson is parlaying his GIR prowress into a Q-school lead. And Joe Durant is always near the lead here. Good check-casher. Shoots his handicap consistently.
Ok, enough of being a smart-ass. Obviously GIR is nice. Being at the top of that stat just doesn't tell you much about top tour players.
Putt for the dough.
By the way, the stats do show you how much Brad Faxon is a true outlier. Last in GIR and wayyyyy below the median or average numbers and near the top in putting. It's amazing to be able stay on the Tour for so long hitting so many fewer greens-in-regulation. And imagine being able to stay on Tour and shoot under par scores on Tour courses hitting half the greens in regulation when some players hit more than two-thirds in regulation. Unbelievable short game.
Last edited:
Exactly.
Brutal.
Of course if they had made the extra point you would have been subjected to College Football Overtime. A travesty of rules. Like settling tied golf tournaments on the practice green.
I know you're mostly being a smart-ass
but these are not stats. They're results. They tell who, but we want to know why...I know you're mostly being a smart-ass
If you didn't know who, it wouldn't matter why.
If you didn't know who, it wouldn't matter why.
Yea, but we do know who
. So let's get to the why now...Yea, but we do know who
No one knows the why, it keeps changing like the weather, that's why they keep stats,to try and figure out the why, so far they haven't. The experts think they know, but how can you be sure. Maybe it's all luck... lol
Last edited:
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
I honestly dont think you'll ever be able to know which stats directly correlate to success because there are so many facets of the game. A great putter doesnt need to have great ball striking stats and vice versa. Proximity to hole might be more important from 125 for one player and from 150 for another. It depends on how they play the course. What about if a player cant get over the top because of poor chipping, then for him its all about up and down percentage.
Richie3Jack
New
Correlation statistics, if the correlation is strong enough, can usually give a solid ballpark on what you need to do. The problem with the stats in golf is none of the correlations are really *that* strong. In order to become a very strong correlation, you need to 'combine' the stats like GIR, Putts/GIR, and scrambling.
Plus, many of the stats are a bit ambiguous. I can hit a GIR, but have a far worse birdie putt than another golfer who is just off the fringe. I could have the same amount of putts/gir as another golfer, but have significantly longer birdie putts. The same type of thinking with scrambling, driving accuracy, etc.
I think the stats I listed earlier and the order they are in provide a decent rule of thumb, but there are some obvious flaws.
3JACK
birdie_man
New
- Status