Confession of a Dalton Defender

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 03:20 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's such an insane argument that you can't make any valid points against it.

You have a problem with it including YPA because it hurts QBs depending on their scheme.

I mentioned how TDs, yards, and every other stat possible is affected by scheme as well, but you don't seem to care much about that.

I wonder why?

[Shake n Blake]

(05-28-2015, 12:23 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Passer rating is nowhere NEAR QBR. Passer rating is a calculation, but it is solely based on quantifiable stats. TDs, INTs, completions %, etc. These are all measurable. There's no opinion whatsoever. 

QBR adds subjective data which is why it should never be used by anyone wishing their analysis to be taken seriously.

This is true and I've never been a fan of ESPN's QBR.

That said, aren't PFF grades also based completely on subjective data? Yet many treat PFF grades as if they're the gospel.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 03:30 PM)djs7685 Wrote: You have a problem with it including YPA because it hurts QBs depending on their scheme.

I mentioned how TDs, yards, and every other stat possible is affected by scheme as well, but you don't seem to care much about that.

I wonder why?

Oh, so you are agreeing with me about passer rating now? I knew you weren't that dumb.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 03:31 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This is true and I've never been a fan of ESPN's QBR.

That said, aren't PFF grades also based completely on subjective data? Yet many treat PFF grades as if they're the gospel.

PFF grades can be questioned, but their in depth statistics are just awesome.

The main reason I have a subscription is for all of the advanced stats. It's nice to see things more in depth than the basics that we're given by the NFL, ESPN, Yahoo, and anywhere else.

It's nice to see how certain receivers performed in the slot compared to the outside or the tackling efficiency of LBs. Some of it is technically subjective as well (drops for example), but I trust PFF more than anywhere else when it comes to statistics. They have no problem going back and amending issues when they re-watch all of the games each week after their initial grades and stats are loaded into the database. They're always willing to admit they're "wrong" if they see something that they disagree with from their original numbers, I like that.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 03:34 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Oh, so you are agreeing with me about passer rating now? I knew you weren't that dumb.

No.

I'm saying that if you're going to sit here and stomp your feet because passer rating isn't fair, then you need to cry about TDs, yards, and completion percentage not being fair either.

But you don't.

Because you ARE that dumb.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 03:36 PM)djs7685 Wrote: No.

I'm saying that if you're going to sit here and stomp your feet because passer rating isn't fair, then you need to cry about TDs, yards, and completion percentage not being fair either.

But you don't.

Because you ARE that dumb.

Oh I guess your brain just can't handle it then. I bet if you worked on your critical thinking skills you might get it one day.

You just hate the fact I like using real stats that you can actually see. When you like looking at made up stats like passer rating. 

The more a QB works to get the real stats actually show what they can do, but the made up stats is at best hypothetical.

Nice try though. Better luck next time.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 03:48 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Oh I guess your brain just can't handle it then. I bet if you worked on your critical thinking skills you might get it one day.

You just hate the fact I like using real stats that you can actually see. When you like looking at made up stats like passer rating. 

The more a QB works to get the real stats actually show what they can do, but the made up stats is at best hypathetical.

Nice try though. Better luck next time.

Hah.

Good luck looking like a complete fool in the future, I'm sure it will work out very well for you if you keep up this absurd behavior on here.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 03:54 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Hah.

Lol that's pretty desperate to correct someone's spelling to make yourself look better.

[Hoofhearted]

(05-28-2015, 03:12 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I understand that you're making THE most insane argument that I've ever heard someone attempt to make in the history of Jungle Noise.

Does anybody else think passer rating is a silly, "made up" statistic that doesn't really matter? Anybody? Anybody at all?

I think it's a useful tool. But I guess the argument is whether or not it is a good gauge for all QBs, since most teams run different style offenses. I think of it being = to WAR in baseball. Good scientific way to gauge players. but like most things, there's probably going to be some flaws 

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 03:54 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Hah.

Good luck looking like a complete fool in the future, I'm sure it will work out very well for you if you keep up this absurd behavior on here.

lol you seem mad my argument tore your argument to shreds. Don't get so butt hurt next time. It's just a message board.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 04:00 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Lol that's pretty desperate to correct someone's spelling to make yourself look better.

I was pointing out that it was amusing that you insulted my intelligence and then conveniently spelled "hypothetical" like a 7 year old may attempt it. It clearly wasn't a typo, so you just may want to put that genius brain of yours to better use.

(05-28-2015, 04:02 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: I think it's a useful tool. But I guess the argument is whether or not it is a good gauge for all QBs, since most teams run different style offenses. I think of it being = to WAR in baseball. Good scientific way to gauge players. but like most things, there's probably going to be some flaws 

Like I said, if you're going to say that it's scheme dependent, that's fine, but then so are TDs, yards, completion%, and pretty much every other stat in the game.

It's not even an argument over whether it's some crazy statistic that should or shouldn't matter. I would just like to see some consistency in arguments from such a self proclaimed genius.

(05-28-2015, 04:03 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: lol you seem mad my argument tore your argument to shreds. Don't get so butt hurt next time. It's just a message board.

It's funny that you think so highly of yourself. You remind me a lot of an old banned member of the other board, I just can't put my finger on who it is though..

A troll says stuff like "HAH MY ARGUEMTN BROKE URS!@!@!!".

IF you believe passer rating is affected by scheme, then you must admit that TDs and yards are also affected by scheme. If you don't, you're unintelligent and a hypocrite. If that's how you'd like to portray yourself, be my guest. I'm not the one that looks "wrong" because you choose to publicly display hypocrisy.

[Bhones10]

(05-28-2015, 04:07 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I was pointing out that it was amusing that you insulted my intelligence and then conveniently spelled "hypothetical" like a 7 year old may attempt it. It clearly wasn't a typo, so you just may want to put that genius brain of yours to better use.


Like I said, if you're going to say that it's scheme dependent, that's fine, but then so are TDs, yards, completion%, and pretty much every other stat in the game.

It's not even an argument over whether it's some crazy statistic that should or shouldn't matter. I would just like to see some consistency in arguments from such a self proclaimed genius.


It's funny that you think so highly of yourself. You remind me a lot of an old banned member of the other board, I just can't put my finger on who it is though..

A troll says stuff like "HAH MY ARGUEMTN BROKE URS!@!@!!".

IF you believe passer rating is affected by scheme, then you must admit that TDs and yards are also affected by scheme. If you don't, you're unintelligent and a hypocrite. If that's how you'd like to portray yourself, be my guest. I'm not the one that looks "wrong" because you choose to publicly display hypocrisy.

The bickering is amazing, given the circumstance when the Bengals drafted Green and Dalton who would would you have drafted? Would you have drafted another's quarterback and not get Green with the fourth pick? If anyone says Bridgewater wait until he gets to the playoffs then see. dalton came to a team in desparete need of a Quarterback and a very bad record worse team than the Vikings. This is the year for Dalton to the best he can be with all of his weapons intact. Then as his contract allows the Bengals may go another route. I was amazed we even made the playoffs last year with all the injuries at key positions. The bengals are my team but it is not as serious as some take it is just a game. I have been a Bengals fan a long time i went to the first game when i was 11 with my Dad. We are lucky to be competitive for a extended time we will have a great year injuries permitting.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 04:07 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I was pointing out that it was amusing that you insulted my intelligence and then conveniently spelled "hypothetical" like a 7 year old may attempt it. It clearly wasn't a typo, so you just may want to put that genius brain of yours to better use.


Like I said, if you're going to say that it's scheme dependent, that's fine, but then so are TDs, yards, completion%, and pretty much every other stat in the game.

It's not even an argument over whether it's some crazy statistic that should or shouldn't matter. I would just like to see some consistency in arguments from such a self proclaimed genius.


It's funny that you think so highly of yourself. You remind me a lot of an old banned member of the other board, I just can't put my finger on who it is though..

A troll says stuff like "HAH MY ARGUEMTN BROKE URS!@!@!!".

IF you believe passer rating is affected by scheme, then you must admit that TDs and yards are also affected by scheme. If you don't, you're unintelligent and a hypocrite. If that's how you'd like to portray yourself, be my guest. I'm not the one that looks "wrong" because you choose to publicly display hypocrisy.

Like I said you insulting someone because they misspelled a word wrong is a pretty desperate move to try and make themselves look better.

Yeah scheme affects TDs and yards to a certain point, but TD and yards help you win games not passer rating. Passer rating is affected by scheme more so than TDs and yards. It benefits QBs that don't throw as much attempts than QBs that puts the offense on their backs and throws more attempts. Also if a QB could throw as many TDs and yards as Dalton has they would scheme around the QB like we do. If they can't then they will limit how often the QB will throw the ball like how multiple other teams do.

Also about the consistency when have I ever wanted to use any made up stat? Name one post where I want to use them. I always like to use the real stats that you can see and prove. It's funny that you try and call me a hypocrite because of that especially when you can never see me wanting to use other stats.

You need to stop acting like a big baby every time you are proven wrong too. I would be embarrassed if I were you.

[spazz70]

(05-28-2015, 05:02 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Like I said you insulting someone because they misspelled a word wrong is a pretty desperate move to try and make themselves look better.

Yeah scheme affects TDs and yards to a certain point, but TD and yards help you win games not passer rating. Passer rating is affected by scheme more so than TDs and yards. It benefits QBs that don't throw as much attempts than QBs that puts the offense on their backs and throws more attempts. Also if a QB could throw as many TDs and yards as Dalton has they would scheme around the QB like we do. If they can't then they will limit how often the QB will throw the ball like how multiple other teams do.

Also about the consistency when have I ever wanted to use any made up stat? Name one post where I want to use them. I always like to use the real stats that you can see and prove. It's funny that you try and call me a hypocrite because of that especially when you can never see me wanting to use other stats.

You need to stop acting like a big baby every time you are proven wrong too. I would be embarrassed if I was you.

Passer Rating uses 5 stats....attempts, completions, yards, TDs, INTs...these are viable visible stats....They have a formula that is equal to all QBs in the league whether the scheme is run heavy, passy heavy or somewhere in between....It is a percentage based rating...There is no reason that this would seem a "made up" stat...just my opinion

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 05:17 PM)spazz70 Wrote: Passer Rating uses 5 stats....attempts, completions, yards, TDs, INTs...these are viable visible stats....They have a formula that is equal to all QBs in the league whether the scheme is run heavy, passy heavy or somewhere in between....It is a percentage based rating...There is no reason that this would seem a "made up" stat...just my opinion

Just read what I have already posted in this thread.  it expains everything

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 05:02 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Like I said you insulting someone because they misspelled a word wrong is a pretty desperate move to try and make themselves look better.

Yeah scheme affects TDs and yards to a certain point, but TD and yards help you win games not passer rating. Passer rating is affected by scheme more so than TDs and yards. It benefits QBs that don't throw as much attempts than QBs that puts the offense on their backs and throws more attempts. Also if a QB could throw as many TDs and yards as Dalton has they would scheme around the QB like we do. If they can't then they will limit how often the QB will throw the ball like how multiple other teams do.

Also about the consistency when have I ever wanted to use any made up stat? Name one post where I want to use them. I always like to use the real stats that you can see and prove. It's funny that you try and call me a hypocrite because of that especially when you can never see me wanting to use other stats.

You need to stop acting like a big baby every time you are proven wrong too. I would be embarrassed if I were you.

I'm genuinely curious if you think it makes you look good to berate people in every post you make that disagrees with your (absurd) thoughts.

You want to say passer rating is skewed depending on scheme. TDs and yards are also skewed depending on scheme. You can go on and on about how "made up" and useless passer rating is, but good luck being alone in that party.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 06:39 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I'm genuinely curious if you think it makes you look good to berate people in every post you make that disagrees with your (absurd) thoughts.

Hahaha and you call me a hypocrite

[*rfaulk34*]

(05-28-2015, 02:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Same deal as last time

QB1 =270/430 (62.7%) 3300 yards 22 TDs 11 INTs
QB2 = 380/590 (64.4%) 4200 yards 30 TDs 14 INTs


If you said QB2 you would be wrong. QB1 has 92.7, and QB2 has 91.7. Even though QB2 has 900 more yards 8 more TDs and only 3 more INTs he is rated lower than QB1. I would pick QB2 over QB1 any day of the week.

Oh and you still didn't answer my question about what QB you would pick. I'm not talking about anything other than stats.

3300/430= 7.7
4200/590= 7.1

Higher att, tds and yards doesn't mean higher QB rating. 

You're kind of making my argument for me. Two pretty different QBs and their QB rating is 1.0 points different. 

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 06:52 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: 3300/430= 7.7
4200/590= 7.1

Higher att, tds and yards doesn't mean higher QB rating. 

You're kind of making my argument for me. Two pretty different QBs and their QB rating is 1.0 points different. 

One QB is statistically way better than the other and gets a lower rating is making your point?

[*rfaulk34*]

(05-28-2015, 03:20 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's such an insane argument that you can't make any valid points against it.

Yo. Don't go all Brad.