(04-09-2018, 01:30 PM)wo lverine515151 Wrote: His ratings seem high because 1) Green is a great receiver and one the very best deep threats in the league. He adjusts to a lot of those bad deep throws better than anyone

just your opinion.

(04-09-2018, 01:30 PM)wo lverine515151 Wrote: 2) the ratings system is flawed and puts a huge emphasis on where the ball is thrown, that is why he can go 3 for 16 with 2 TD's and they give him a 106 rating. 

Does not matter as long as the same formula is used for every QB.

(04-09-2018, 01:30 PM)wo lverine515151 Wrote:  3) He does pick his spots and throws less deep balls. He throws into larger windows than someone who chucks it downfield a lot more.

He throws fewer deep passes because fewer deep passes are called.  It has nothing to do with the size of the "window"

(04-10-2018, 08:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: just your opinion.


Does not matter as long as the same formula is used for every QB.


He throws fewer deep passes because fewer deep passes are called.  It has nothing to do with the size of the "window"

Of course the quality of who your'e throwing the ball to matters. That is not opinion, that is a factual statement. If you have the best deep threat in green to throw to ball, as well as other players he had as deep threats like marvin jones , then it will matter a huge amount.

Here is someone that does share my supposed opinion. Look who is number one. AJ Green

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000711510/article/aj-green-desean-jackson-among-top-10-deep-threats

Here is someone that does share my supposed opinion. Look who is number two. Marvin Jones

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000920662/article/tyreek-hill-marvin-jones-among-best-deepthreat-wrs-of-2017

If they use the same flawed formula then it does matter. The qb rating system is subjective and assigns weights to each category. Who says those weights that are assigned are correct.  Yes it will matter if some qb's throw it more often away from the end zone as opposed to a qb only throwing it when he's close to the end zone. That is why dalton can go 3 for 16 one year and they give him a 106 qb rating. 

I'll use an extreme example. What if in mlb they use a flawed formula that says, for every odd inning you get two points for a hit and even innings you get one point for a hit. Then if some hitter gets more hits in the odd innings, they will have a higher point total. So how is that fair even though this absurdly flawed formula is applied the same to everyone.

Heres a link showing Dalton ranking 17th in the league in bad throws for 2014 , which is below average, yet he had a well above average qb rating on deep throws over 30 yards of 107 . If he's throwing more bad balls on average his deep ball should show a below average rating.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2015/2014-incomplete-pass-breakdown-passers

 It does matter how often the ball is thrown deep. If the qb throws it less often he is picking his spots and more likely to complete the pass and get a higher rating because the windows, on average , were bigger .  How do you know that, for each play, the pass plays called for were not a deep pass. How would you know that Dalton didn't have as many deep pass plays called as someone like big ben, yet decided to check it down more often because receivers weren't open enough for his liking. Do you have access to the plays that were called. That is purely opinion .

(04-10-2018, 12:55 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: The qb rating system is subjective. 

No, it isn't. The QB rating system may have it's flaws, but it is NOT subjective.

(04-07-2018, 08:39 PM)PDub80 Wrote: The O Line finished the year ranked 13th in 2016. If that's NOT Okay, you must think 15th and below ranked Andy Dalton is garbage?

2015 the O line was 8th
2014 7th

Now, what BS is in the next car on your excuse train?

13th? In 2016?! Based on what? What fantasy site did you get that ranking from? PFF? How in the name of Anthony Munoz did they come to the conclusion that the Bengals OL was above average in 2016? I thought it was common knowledge that even the estimalbe Mike Brown conceded the OL needed improving before the start of 2017. Who knew that EVERY SINGLE ANALYST EVERYWHERE except those at PFF were wrong that the Bengals OL was actually GOOD in 2016?

For comparison sakes, Football Outsiders ranked our OL that year has 14th in run blocking and 26th in pass blocking. https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2016  Yet, PFF thinks that equals to being the 13th best? SMH.

Also, why bring up the other years? I've never said the OL stunk every year Dalton's been the QB. Only that the line stunk last season and the season before that. But, if you want to build some strawmen, I'll be more than happy to knock them down for you.

(04-10-2018, 04:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: No, it isn't. The QB rating system may have it's flaws, but it is NOT subjective.

When you put weights on things like, completion % , yard, td , that is someone putting in there own beliefs on how much they should count. That is the definition of subjective. That is not an absolute truth but someone putting weights based on what they believe it should be. That is absolutely subjective.

(04-10-2018, 05:36 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: When you put weights on things like,  completion % , yard, td , that is someone putting in there own beliefs on how much they should count. That is the definition of subjective.  That is not an absolute truth but someone putting weights based on what they believe it should be. That is absolutely subjective.

It is more important that the input data be objective than the formula.

As long as the input data is objective than every QB is being compared equally.  The problem comes when the input data is subjective i.e., "window size", "receiver adjustment", etc.

So if you feel the formulas is flawed then show comaprisons between QBs witha different formula.  just don't use subjective input data.  That is what makes the rankings less reliable.

So explain what is wrong with the current NFL pass efficiency rating and show where Dalton would stand compared to all other QBs with adifferent formula.

(04-10-2018, 12:55 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Here is someone that does share my supposed opinion. Look who is number two. Marvin Jones

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000920662/article/tyreek-hill-marvin-jones-among-best-deepthreat-wrs-of-2017

How can he share your opinion when he says Green is NOT one of the best deep threat WRs?

(04-10-2018, 12:55 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Heres a link showing Dalton ranking 17th in the league in bad throws for 2014 , which is below average, yet he had a well above average qb rating on deep throws over 30 yards of 107 . If he's throwing more bad balls on average his deep ball should show a below average rating.

This is not true at all.  If it were then there would be no need to look at the passes broken down by distance. Instead we would just look at his total numbers and say they all apply to his deep throws.

Also "bad throws" is another subjective measure subject to the personal bias of the person collecting the data.

(04-11-2018, 08:18 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is not true at all.  If it were then there would be no need to look at the passes broken down by distance. Instead we would just look at his total numbers and say they all apply to his deep throws.

Also "bad throws" is another subjective measure subject to the personal bias of the person collecting the data.

Right, because none of the Dalton Gang fan club have personal bias in this discussion.   Nope. None at all all. Especially when compared to researchers and professional writers, film watchers, and data compilers. Everyone knows those guys are alllllll out to get Andy Dalton and the Bengals. Bwahahahahaha...

BTW, I'm compiling and calculating stats that flat out poop on the (horribly interpreted and misleading) stats Shake threw out. Passer rating on deep balls.... Garbage stat. Throwing that out there as some sort of flag to plant in the ground just shows the lack of understanding. Which, in turn, helps me to understand the Dalton love: You guys just don't understand. Or, more likely, don't want to.

(04-11-2018, 11:24 AM)PDub80 Wrote: BTW, I'm compiling and calculating stats that flat out poop on the (horribly interpreted and misleading) stats Shake threw out. Passer rating on deep balls.... Garbage stat. Throwing that out there as some sort of flag to plant in the ground just shows the lack of understanding. Which, in turn, helps me to understand the Dalton love: You guys just don't understand. Or, more likely, don't want to.

Another recap:

1. Dalton gets called a horrible deep passer.
2. What would be the first stat people generally would want to look at to verify whether this claim is true? I would think base stats and passer rating...right?
3. I compiled the base stats and passer rating on deep balls for his entire career.
4. You whine that the 21-30 yard category favors Dalton.
5. I remove the 21-30 yard category, and Dalton is even better.
6. Now you resort to blindly calling them misinterpreted/misleading "garbage" stats.

Since I got rid of the 21-30 yard category that you initially had a problem with, what else is wrong with the stats I posted, besides "they don't make Dalton look bad"?

The stats are what they are. I didn't manipulate a damn thing.

(04-11-2018, 08:10 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is more important that the input data be objective than the formula.

As long as the input data is objective than every QB is being compared equally.  The problem comes when the input data is subjective i.e., "window size", "receiver adjustment", etc.

So if you feel the formulas is flawed then show comaprisons between QBs witha different formula.  just don't use subjective input data.  That is what makes the rankings less reliable.

So explain what is wrong with the current NFL pass efficiency rating and show where Dalton would stand compared to all other QBs with adifferent formula.

The bottom line is all the formulas are subjective, they all use human opinion to formulate them. Its important that not only the input be objective, but also the formula itself. The qb rating puts weights on different parameters which is subjective, so does pff and brickwallblitz.  Anytime some human comes up with a formula and puts weights on things like completion %, TD, or decides whether something was a tight window or large window, its subjective. 

Using brickwallblitz he was about a C on deep throws, so using that formula it would rank him around 15 - 20. 

I use brickwallblitz stats because at least it takes a lot more things into account than the qb rating. The qb rating puts heavy emphasis on where the ball is thrown!  Dalton went 3 of 16 one year with 2 TD and gets a 106!! I don't care if its applied evenly, it's still using subjective human input to decide the weights and apply a flawed formula to the deep throws. 

I even looked at Fitzpatrick's deep throw qb rating numbers over 40 yards, it has him rated over 100 since 2012, and we all know Fitzpatrick has a weak arm and shanks a lot of balls over 30 yards. I didn't even think Fitzpatrick could throw it over 40 yards. If it is showing Fitzpatrick as an elite deep thrower over 40 yards then the qb rating formula is flawed.

(04-11-2018, 08:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: How can he share your opinion when he says Green is NOT one of the best deep threat WRs?

For 2017 Green was not, but for most of his career Green was the top deep threat. The whole bengals team had a bad offensive year and Greens deep numbers went down because of that. 

(04-11-2018, 11:35 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Another recap:

1. Dalton gets called a horrible deep passer.
2. What would be the first stat people generally would want to look at to verify whether this claim is true? I would think base stats and passer rating...right?
3. I compiled the base stats and passer rating on deep balls for his entire career.
4. You whine that the 21-30 yard category favors Dalton.
5. I remove the 21-30 yard category, and Dalton is even better.
6. Now you resort to blindly calling them misinterpreted/misleading "garbage" stats.

Since I got rid of the 21-30 yard category that you initially had a problem with, what else is wrong with the stats I posted, besides "they don't make Dalton look bad"?

The stats are what they are. I didn't manipulate a damn thing.

Again, this is paltering.

You're showing one statistic (passer rating on deep throws over 31 yards) and sitting on it as if it paints an entire picture. That's flat out wrong. It's a conclusion presented with wildly incomplete data.

Most QBs have high passer ratings on deep throws like that.

Why don't you look at completion % on those throws? Why don't you look at throws missed out of bounds? Why don't you review film of these throws to actually analyze the play itself? Etc. Etc.

^ One of the links I posted did that and so so much more. And they rated Dalton poorly and below avg to last in the NFL in some of these statistics every year.

Before you say film doesn't matter and that the result is the result, let me warn you to be cautious there in this debate. Because if nothing else matters than the result you cannot sit on a poor O Line causing any issues. If the result is the result for the QB when it's good than it has to be the same when he's bad.

As far as the 20-30 yard throws, your data there is poor and incomplete as well. I'll fix that tomorrow.

I'm all for being wrong. But you can't post incomplete and vietually inconsquential data without comparison or context... while ignoring other evidence... and then think people will eat it up. That's paltering.

(04-11-2018, 08:18 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is not true at all.  If it were then there would be no need to look at the passes broken down by distance. Instead we would just look at his total numbers and say they all apply to his deep throws.

Also "bad throws" is another subjective measure subject to the personal bias of the person collecting the data.

If Dalton is throwing bad throws it is more likely to happen on a deep throw than a short throw.  So if these bad balls do occur they are much more likely to happen on a deep throw,  that is just logical, no data needs to prove the obvious. 

(04-11-2018, 08:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: How can he share your opinion when he says Green is NOT one of the best deep threat WRs?

I believe AJ Green's career numbers have suffered greatly with Andy Dalton as the QB. Unfortunately, AJ's position is very much reliant on how good or bad Andy is. Andy was garbage in 2017, therefore, Green didn't have a strong year there.

For his career, AJ Green has been outstanding deep and one of the best all around WR in the NFL.

(04-11-2018, 02:19 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Andy was garbage in 2017,

59.9% completion % on 496 passing attempts for 3,320 yards, 25 TDs, 12 INTs and a QB rating of 86.6 = garbage?

Dude wasn't great in 2017, but to claim he's garbage and then claim that other's analyses is wrong or misinformed or "paltering" ... ? That's just wrong, man.

(04-11-2018, 11:21 AM)PDub80 Wrote: Right, because none of the Dalton Gang fan club have personal bias in this discussion.   Nope. None at all all. Especially when compared to researchers and professional writers, film watchers, and data compilers. Everyone knows those guys are alllllll out to get Andy Dalton and the Bengals. Bwahahahahaha...

No one said it was just against Dalton.  So I am not sure what your point is.

All I know is that subjective graders like the ones you praise claimed Dre Kirkpatrick was ranked 112th behind a lot of scrub DBs that barely played while Dre was playing 97% of the snaps for the #5 pass defense and ranking in the top 30 in every objective coverage stat.

When the input is subjective you get garbage like that.  It just is not accurate.

(04-11-2018, 02:12 PM)wolverine515151 Wrote:   Anytime some human comes up with a formula and puts weights on things like completion %, TD, or decides whether something was a tight window or large window, its subjective. 

No.  there is a big difference.  Completion % and tds are objective.  The size of the window is subjective.

All formulas will be subjective when deciding how much weight to give each input but as long as the input is objective it traets all players the same.  When you start using subjective input like "window size" then it is likely that all players are not being treated the same.

(04-11-2018, 02:19 PM)PDub80 Wrote:  AJ's position is very much reliant on how good or bad Andy is. 

For his career, AJ Green has been outstanding deep and one of the best all around WR in the NFL.

Since Dalton's performance determins how good Green is then  for Greens career Dalton has been outstanding throwing the ball deep and one of the best all around in the NFL.