08-14-2018, 01:09 PM
(08-14-2018, 12:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We can discuss their value if you want, but they are not "meaningless".
For example a lot of people rave about Dennard, but he was targeted on shorter passes (8.1 avg dist) than Shaw (11.4) last year. In '16 the average distance on Shaw's targets (10.1) was greater than Pac (9.7) and almost the same as Kirkpatrick (10.9).
When you look at the players at the top of these lists it is obvious that the stats are not "meaningless" the best CBs generally rank near the top. I never claimed they were perfect, but they at least are more than just the opinion of amateurs around here.
I’m trolling you at this point cause I think it’s funny and you’re an easy target. I’m sure these stats have value but I do believe context (like what you just provided) helps. Yards and yards per carry or tds, sacks are all stats were familiar enough with to understand. These more analytical stats need to be contextualized to be meaningful for most of us.
I like what you provide to the forum. I also like screwing with you.
