Confession of a Dalton Defender

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 11:43 AM)bfine32 Wrote: And of those that had more attempts that Andy only 2 had a higher YPA. So your YPA hurting Andy kinda seems silly.

How is that? The ones that had lower YPA had lower completion %.

[WhoDeyWho]

(05-28-2015, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 2 things:

1st: Although his rating dipped in year 4 it is still 11 points higher than it was as a rookie. Andy's is around 5.

2nd: Peyton had already shown the potential to be elite. he was the 4th rated QB in year 2 and 6th rated in year 3.   Hell, the year he "dropped" he was tied for 8th. In that same 3 year span of his career Andy has been rated; 13th, 15th, and 25th.

You're a bright guy. Which one of those 2 shows signs of a more promising career?

1st: Petyon's rating was 10 points lower than Dalton's as a rookie.  
2nd: In year's 2 and 3 their stat lines aren't at all that different.  
3rd:  The year he dropped off he threw 23 interceptions.  Dalton's never thrown more than 20 in a season.  

[*bfine32*]

(05-28-2015, 11:48 AM)Nately120 Wrote: What point did I make? 

Hell, don't ask me. I have no clue.

[*bfine32*]

(05-28-2015, 11:53 AM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: 1st: Petyon's rating was 10 points lower than Dalton's as a rookie.  
2nd: In year's 2 and 3 their stat lines aren't at all that different.  
3rd:  The year he dropped off he threw 23 interceptions.  Dalton's never thrown more than 20 in a season.  

1st. Already mentioned Andy's fine rating for a rookie. Kinda blows the "He suffered starting as a rookie" slant out of the water.

2nd: Unfortunately, there is about a 15 year difference and raw number have increased drastically in that timeframe. So probably best we compare them to their peers. (I have actually heard folks suggest Andy suffers because his peers are better).

3rd: The year he dropped he was also rated #8 in the NFL Andy was #25. Why pick a singular stat?

Like I asked Phil. Which QB do you think showed better promise?

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 03:49 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The YPA difference is 9.4 to 13.9. A 4.5 yard diff in a single game is huge. Check the ypa difference between QBs on a seasonal basis. I edited my previous post with examples.

QB1- 330/35 (9.4) x .25= 2.35
QB2- 250/18 (13.9) x .25= 3.48

That's a difference of 1.1 pts when the difference in seasonal averages is in hundredths of points. Using one game does not support your argument as no QB is going to average 13 yards per pass for a season with zero interceptions.

Even if you add 1 INT to both of them you get QB1 = 91.3, and QB2 100.4

YPA is too heavily favored in passer rating. People who are in a WCO who have a lot more attempts, and short to intermediate throws get penalized because of that. QB1 should have a higher passer rating than QB2, but he doesn't.

What QB would you want to start for you? That was the whole point. I know how passer rating is calculated.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 12:04 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I know how passer rating is calculated.

After seeing you berate bfine about how he needs to "learn the game" better by calling passer rating a made up stat, and it took multiple posters explaining to you that ESPN QBR =/= passer rating....I'm not so sure that anyone would believe that you understand how it's calculated.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 12:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1st. Already mentioned Andy's fine rating for a rookie. Kinda blows the "He suffered starting as a rookie" slant out of the water.

2nd: Unfortunately, there is about a 15 year difference and raw number have increased drastically in that timeframe. So probably best we compare them to their peers. (I have actually heard folks suggest Andy suffers because his peers are better).

3rd: The year he dropped he was also rated #8 in the NFL Andy was #25. Why pick a singular stat?

Like I asked Phil. Which QB do you think showed better promise?

your 1st point - How does that "Kinda blows the 'He suffered starting as a rookie' slant out of the water."? Because Dalton did decent his first year that means that he didn't suffer from having no training camp, or a year to learn his new offense compared to people who did? lol ok nice logic.

your 3rd point - Dalton's passer rating would have been rated #10 that year too, so what's your point?

[*PhilHos*]

(05-28-2015, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 2 things:

1st: Although his rating dipped in year 4 it is still 11 points higher than it was as a rookie. Andy's is around 5.

First off, Andy's is around 3 (80.4 in year 1 to 83.5 in year 4). Might want to get your facts straight if you want to be taken seriously. Just sayin'.

Secondly, Peyton had a higher drop from year 3 (94.7) to year 4 (84.1) than Dalton (88.8 to 83.5). So :tongue:

Lastly, the point that YOU made was that one "would expect someone that was forced to start from year one to drastically increase by year 4". Peyton did not. Ergo, the same said about Dalton should be said about Peyton after year 4.

(05-28-2015, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 2nd: Peyton had already shown the potential to be elite. he was the 4th rated QB in year 2 and 6th rated in year 3.   Hell, the year he "dropped" he was tied for 8th. In that same 3 year span of his career Andy has been rated; 13th, 15th, and 25th.

You're a bright guy. Which one of those 2 shows signs of a more promising career?

Oh, is that what we were arguing about? I thought it was about how QBs are not supposed to be worse in their 4th season than in their previous 2. My bad. <_<

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 12:08 PM)djs7685 Wrote: After seeing you berate bfine about how he needs to "learn the game" better by calling passer rating a made up stat, and it took multiple posters explaining to you that ESPN QBR =/= passer rating....I'm not so sure that anyone would believe that you understand how it's calculated.

Passer rating is still a made up stat. I put it in the same group as QBR, so my bad for mixing up the names. I wasn't even talking about ESPNs QBR anyways. Everything I said about it is true, so what's your point?

[*Nately120*]

(05-28-2015, 11:59 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, don't ask me. I have no clue.

And yet you assumed I was being gravely serious and critical of you.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-28-2015, 12:18 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Passer rating is still a made up stat. I put it in the same group as QBR, so my bad for mixing up the names. Everything I said about it is true, so what's your point?

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.

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 12:18 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Passer rating is still a made up stat. I put it in the same group as QBR, so my bad for mixing up the names. I wasn't even talking about ESPNs QBR anyways. Everything I said about it is true, so what's your point?

My point is that it's "made up" by the same people that "made up" touchdowns, yards, and interceptions being credited to a QB as well.

Andy throwing 33 TDs means nothing because it's just a dumb made up stat. You should learn something about football. Maybe if you stopped using made up stats so much, you'd know more about the game.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-28-2015, 12:24 PM)djs7685 Wrote: My point is that it's "made up" by the same people that "made up" touchdowns, yards, and interceptions being credited to a QB as well.

Andy throwing 33 TDs means nothing because it's just a dumb made up stat. You should learn something about football. Maybe if you stopped using made up stats so much, you'd know more about the game.

Stats that count things like TDs and INTs are not "made up"; they're just counting things. Stats like passer rating, INT%, TD%, and yards per attempt kinda are.

I get your point and I'm on your side on this, but they are technically "made up" by someone.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 12:24 PM)djs7685 Wrote: My point is that it's "made up" by the same people that "made up" touchdowns, yards, and interceptions being credited to a QB as well.

Andy throwing 33 TDs means nothing because it's just a dumb made up stat. You should learn something about football. Maybe if you stopped using made up stats so much, you'd know more about the game.

No TDs not a made up stat. I can show you film where someone throws a TD, but you can't show film that someone throws passer rating.

[WhoDeyWho]

(05-28-2015, 12:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1st. Already mentioned Andy's fine rating for a rookie. Kinda blows the "He suffered starting as a rookie" slant out of the water.

2nd: Unfortunately, there is about a 15 year difference and raw number have increased drastically in that timeframe. So probably best we compare them to their peers. (I have actually heard folks suggest Andy suffers because his peers are better).

3rd: The year he dropped he was also rated #8 in the NFL Andy was #25. Why pick a singular stat?

Like I asked Phil. Which QB do you think showed better promise?

I'd say Manning, and it obviously had very little to do with production given the similarity of their stats at the time.  Peyton Manning was one of the most heralded draft picks of all time.  

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 12:28 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Stats that count things like TDs and INTs are not "made up"; they're just counting things. Stats like passer rating, INT%, TD%, and yards per attempt kinda are.

I get your point and I'm on your side on this, but they are technically "made up" by someone.

I was talking about passer rating the whole time I just said QBR

[*bfine32*]

(05-28-2015, 12:17 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Oh, is that what we were arguing about? I thought it was about how QBs are not supposed to be worse in their 4th season than in their previous 2. My bad. <_<

Actually I said drastically increase "by year 4". Peyton had shown dramatic improvemment by year 4 including achieving a rating of 90 or higher twice and being Top 8 in passer rating for 3 staright years.

Andy showed dramatic improvement by.........

[djs7685]

(05-28-2015, 12:28 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: No TDs not a made up stat. I can show you film where someone throws a TD, but you can't show film that someone throws passer rating.

The same company that "made up" passer rating just happened to also "make up" what they call it when one guy throws the ball to another one in a specific area on the field. They also decided that it should be counted and tracked for some reason. Same with when they decided they wanted to "make up" passer rating.

I've honestly never seen such a ridiculous argument in my life.

[*bfine32*]

(05-28-2015, 12:28 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: No TDs not a made up stat. I can show you film where someone throws a TD, but you can't show film that someone throws passer rating.

Is completion percentage a "made up stat" or is there a calculation required like in passer rating?

Do yourself a favor and live to fight another day.

[Brownshoe]

(05-28-2015, 12:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: The same company that "made up" passer rating just happened to also "make up" what they call it when one guy throws the ball to another one in a specific area on the field. They also decided that it should be counted and tracked for some reason. Same with when they decided they wanted to "make up" passer rating.

I've honestly never seen such a ridiculous argument in my life.

No that's not even close to the same. One is a fundimental part of the game where if it was taken out it would no longer be football. It is also physically happening. The other is not. They also place values on stats that actually have different values depending on what kind of offense you have.