I agree that YPA is the best gauge currently kept, and I don’t think it should be dropped, but I think yards per offensive play is helpful in a different context. It levels out the contributions of dual threat players (like both of Mario’s leftovers last year). It also accounts for plays across the context of a drive. Basically yards per attempt/catch/carry show what a player does when he has the ball in that situation — We can tell how Vince does when he passes by looking at his comp % or YPA, we can tell how he does when running by looking at his YPC. Yards per play shows how much a player contributes across the board when he’s on the field.

Another thing that goes overlooked is 3rd and long conversions. That, to me, is the most important thing for a quarterback. If you’re not moving the chains, it doesn’t matter what your completion percentage is (I’m looking at you, Carr).

And you are 100% correct — it is silly to use “intangibles” as your crutch when a players is obviously inferior statistically to another. The only other excuse more frequently used is “it was their teammate’s fault your guy rocked/my guy sucked” (think Carr defenders for this).

I think a good start is to gauge a player’s worth per play run, rather than per game. Tackles or yards per carry/catch are perfect examples. A player will get an inordinately high number of tackles if his team is inordinately bad, esp. on offense. Remember Jamie Sharper leading the NFL in tackles? It was basically due to the offense going 3 and out every drive, so Sharper got more chances. A player on a team with a great defense will get more carries, so his YPG will be higher. By calculating their stats per offensive play run, one can gauge how they are performing in the chances given them compared to others in the NFL.

That said, when you put player A and player B side by side and one of them is markedly better in all areas (especially when you include stuff like turnover ratio, etc.), it’s preposterous to say that the lesser statistical player is still just as good because of some intangible quality.

Sure, you have to account for the O-line performance when talking about RB yards, but that’s why you have to look at the big picture. How did the team’s backup RB fare compared to the starter? Stuff like that.

I realize that it’s team dependent and I think any developments made in the field need to account for that, but I don’t think it’s impossible to compare two players numerically.

I also think the biggest problem with individual stats in football is that the sport is far more team dependent than any other. Most other sports have statistics that allow you to gauge a player’s individual value — a baseball player’s on base percentage is independent of anything his teammates are doing (save that the pitcher may be pitching carefully due to the score or men on base). His strikeout rate is due to his skill or lack thereof with a bat, not his teammate’s performance. Virtually every statistic measured in football is dependent on the entire team, not the player saddled with the stat. David’s completion % would’ve been a lot lower had AJ not been able to catch as much as he can. A RB’s yards from scrimmage is hugely dependent on his OL, you get the idea… There’s also the simple problem of a tiny sample size — you get a lot better idea of a player’s true worth after 162 games than 16. And many priceless football players are specialists and see even less playing time to gauge stats from.

I think the most telling team stats in football are probably a team’s yards per play on offense and defense (rather than points scored or yards per game), their red zone performance, their third down performance, and their turnover ratio. For individual players I look at similar areas — how many yards per play, how do they perform in the red zone, can they convert a “big down” (third down being the most obvious), and most importantly can they hang on to the ball (or take it away from someone on D).