QBR and QBR leaders

[BDawk4Prez]

If stats are the most important part, then riddle me this:

Player A: 300 yards / 3 tds
Player B: 301 yards / 3 tds

Who had the better game?

[More-Than-Most]

If stats are the most important part, then riddle me this:

Player A: 300 yards / 3 tds
Player B: 301 yards / 3 tds

Who had the better game?

so lets ignore the countless posts of stats over a span and how stupid the 3 face stats are by themselves? this right here is when you have no argument at all.

[koldjerky]

If stats are the most important part, then riddle me this:

Player A: 300 yards / 3 tds
Player B: 301 yards / 3 tds

Who had the better game?

To be fair, this is about the 3rd or 4th time a similar example has been used, multiple/much more stats need to be used. But then again, more stats give more context.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDawk4Prez]

so lets ignore the countless posts of stats over a span and how stupid the 3 face stats are by themselves? this right here is when you have no argument at all.

The argument is, no matter how hard you try, numbers cant tell the whole story.

[BDawk4Prez]

To be fair, this is about the 3rd or 4th time a similar example has been used, multiple/much more stats need to be used. But then again, more stats give more context.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I haven’t read the last few pages.

My bad on that.

[More-Than-Most]

give me the rest of the stats.... strength of schedule/YPA/Air Yards/QB rate/QBR/Rushing yards/fumbles/interceptions that werent interceptions/Attempts/Comp

Using 3 face stats tells us nothing

355/606, YPA = 7.1, AYPA = 7.3, passer rating = 88, 5 fumbles, 300+ yards rushing. I'm not looking up "interceptions that werent interceptions" because that's basically not a real stat and IMO falls in line with eye test/context than stats. I'm not looking up QBR because it's ****ing useless.

with those stats i dont think that is very good tbh...

below avg comp/ypa/passer rating.... if he threw it that many times with that comp his saving grace is his ypa for not having more turnovers.... the base stats look good but overall it isnt impressive esp in todays game.... what was the arguement here though about the base stat line?

The argument is that it tells you nothing. At best, you can use stats to reaffirm your preconceived opinion. If I suddenly tell you this is Philip Rivers playing on a **** team with no talent in 2012 and he managed to put up nearly 40 TDs (even with nearly 20 turnovers) you'd be impressed. If I told you it was Dak Prescott playing with a pro bowl roster of talent in 2018, you wouldn't be impressed. If I told you it was Cam Newton you'd say he's garbage and should kill himself. If I tell you it's Wilson you'd get on your knees and worship his godliness and curse his teammates for letting him throw 18 picks. If it were Rodgers, you'd say it's a miracle he threw that many while playing 1 v 11 and snapping himself the ball.

But no, it's actually Blake Bortles in year 2. He had a bad OL, but excellent weapons. He also piled on the stats in garbage time because they were getting buried by bad defense and his INTs. IIRC, he had a crazy number of pick 6s, but the stats don't tell you that either. I watched him all that year because he was my FF QB in a money league; I told everyone he wasn't good, but all anyone cared about was statzzzz and the fact that he was only in year 2. People accused me of "hating young QBs" and then sure enough 2 years later he's the easiest punching bag in the world.

Same **** to a less extreme degree with Carr; i told everyone he wasn't where he should be after his first couple seasons, then 2016 happened and I was a "hater". Then sure enough 3 years later the Raiders weren't committed and his own fan base was sick of his gutless play style regardless of the fact that he was setting personal bests in several categories. This may just be 2016 part 2 where he dupes the Raiders into another awful contract and then goes back to sucking.

that is why i asked for the non face stats.... the non face stats tell a better story then just the 3 face stats you originally gave

If stats are the most important part, then riddle me this:

Player A: 300 yards / 3 tds
Player B: 301 yards / 3 tds

Who had the better game?

so lets ignore the countless posts of stats over a span and how stupid the 3 face stats are by themselves? this right here is when you have no argument at all.

I haven’t read the last few pages.

My bad on that.

there

[More-Than-Most]

The argument is, no matter how hard you try, numbers cant tell the whole story.

who has ever said this? not one person.... they tell the BEST story.... its better to use multiple statistical outputs and other avenues but if you had to choose between 1 of stats/context/eye test the stats will tell you the best story of the 30 plus QBs who play over 100 games a year with over thousands of minutes of played

[BDawk4Prez]

who has ever said this? not one person.... they tell the BEST story.... its better to use multiple statistical outputs and other avenues but if you had to choose between 1 of stats/context/eye test the stats will tell you the best story of the 30 plus QBs who play over 100 games a year with over thousands of minutes of played

For me, the best story is why the stats say what they say. Numbers are cute, and while using more and more certainly help, they don’t show the “why behind the what”.

[mariner4life]

who has ever said this? not one person.... they tell the BEST story.... its better to use multiple statistical outputs and other avenues but if you had to choose between 1 of stats/context/eye test the stats will tell you the best story of the 30 plus QBs who play over 100 games a year with over thousands of minutes of played

Bingo

[mariner4life]

The argument is, no matter how hard you try, numbers cant tell the whole story.

This statement shows you really don’t understand the argument at all.

[BDawk4Prez]

This statement shows you really don’t understand the argument at all.

Not at all.

[mariner4life]

For me, the best story is why the stats say what they say. Numbers are cute, and while using more and more certainly help, they don’t show the “why behind the what”.

The first step in that is the stats right?
You literally just wrote that.

[QQQ]

Buzz Aldren used the eye test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDawk4Prez]

The first step in that is the stats right?
You literally just wrote that.

Stats matter.

They just aren’t the “most important” piece.

[More-Than-Most]

Stats matter.

They just aren’t the “most important” piece.

yes... yes they are. Why does this not filter through with everything that was said? we literally have explained it countless times............ of the 3... stats/eye test/context... stats are the better of the 3... stats can follow the million minutes of games played... the eye test cant and thus context can only go by stats and the eye test..... if you have to choose of the 3 stats that are the best route without anything else... all 3 are fine but one holds more weight then the others............................... how did the eye test hold up pre 2000? thoughts? hell how did the eye test hold up pre 2008? context suffered where people actually thought favre whom i love more than anyone was better than steve young.... he wasnt by the way but yea context/film said other wise but stats we now know this was false....... stats are the best tool we have and they arent perfect but they are the best and better then context/eye test unless you had some tool pre 2000 that could help you watch more than 3 games a week AT BEST and even now that could help you watch thousands of minutes of football to determine who is best per eye test.