Gregg Williams Could be key to Unlocking Potential of Three key Jets

[detectivekimble]

2 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

I don't need to have the actual numbers to understand how one huge statistical outlier of a game effects a small data set.

But, since you have them, again, feel free to share.

Otherwise, keep driving at whatever hollow victory you're after here.

And, this is all assuming that, you know, PFF rankings are an actual true measure of who's the best at anything.

I love the backtracking.

Here's your actual statement: "His PFF numbers were greatly inflated by week 1."  That's a statement of fact, not opinion.  But, you the reality is that have no idea and got called out on your bullsh*t.  For you to make that statement, you would have had to seen his weekly coverage grades.  That's why I'm asking YOU to post them, so you can show us how us all how his 2018 coverage grade was so inflated by his week one performance. 

Don't try to turn it around on me.  I've seen them.  I even posted a few weeks ago that he was one of the top three LBs in coverage for the season:

How would I have known that?

And NFL teams actually use PFF.  PFF > TeddEY

 

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, detectivekimble said:

I love the backtracking.

Here's your actual statement: "His PFF numbers were greatly inflated by week 1."  That's a statement of fact, not opinion.  But, you the reality is that have no idea and got called out on your bullsh*t.  For you to make that statement, you would have had to seen his weekly coverage grades.  That's why I'm asking YOU to post them, so you can show us how us all how his 2018 coverage grade was so inflated by his week one performance. 

Don't try to turn it around on me.  I've seen them.  I even posted a few weeks ago that he was one of the top three LBs in coverage for the season:

How would I have known that?

And NFL teams actually use PFF.  PFF > TeddEY

 

So where are those weekly PFF coverage grades? 

[detectivekimble]

Just now, Philc1 said:

So where are those weekly PFF coverage grades? 

TeddyEY will be posting them shortly.  Maybe you can help him out and do it, since you also made the same (bullsh*t) claim.

[jetsons]

1 hour ago, Philc1 said:

Jets may be forced to switch to a 4-3 if Allen doesn't fall to us at 3.  Who knows what McClendon has left and he's FA.  Clellin Ferrell is a 4-3 DE.  Lee's real position is as a 4-3 MLB similar to what Vilma was

I don't see them drafting Allen @ 3 no matter what... They Hired Williams for a reason & Williams runs the 4-3... Allen is a 3-4 LB... I can see Ferrell being picked, hopefully after a minor trade down.

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, detectivekimble said:

I love the backtracking.

Here's your actual statement: "His PFF numbers were greatly inflated by week 1."  That's a statement of fact, not opinion.  But, you the reality is that have no idea and got called out on your bullsh*t.  For you to make that statement, you would have had to seen his weekly coverage grades.  That's why I'm asking YOU to post them, so you can show us how us all how his 2018 coverage grade was so inflated by his week one performance. 

Don't try to turn it around on me.  I've seen them.  I even posted a few weeks ago that he was one of the top three LBs in coverage for the season:

How would I have known that?

And NFL teams actually use PFF.  PFF > TeddEY

 

I'm comfortable with my statement as a fact.  Prove me wrong...

[detectivekimble]

Just now, TeddEY said:

I'm comfortable with my statement as a fact.  Prove me wrong...

You made the statement.  Back it up.

[Philc1]

3 minutes ago, jetsons said:

I don't see them drafting Allen @ 3 no matter what... They Hired Williams for a reason & Williams runs the 4-3... Allen is a 3-4 LB... I can see Ferrell being picked, hopefully after a minor trade down.

I wouldn't mind a switch to 4-3 and drafting Ferell.  4 man fronts give Brady more trouble that's how the Giants beat him in both Super Bowls

[ZachEY]

14 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

You criticize him for driving at a "hollow victory" when the only thing you've brought to the table is, "No he's not"? Your argument against Lee barely rises above kindergarten logic.

I've actually watched Lee play.  It shouldn't take more than that.  He also did almost nothing in pass coverage the rest of his season.

The hollow victory is him proving that I don't have the weekly numbers, which I never actually claimed to have.  I do, however, understand how outliers affect a small sample size.

Meanwhile, if my point were wrong, he would easily just use the numbers against me, show me that Lee was good all year, and shut me up.  Instead, he's trying to prove I don't have the numbers at my disposal, which, I admit is true.  Instead, he apparently thinks proof of his point is that he said the same thing a few weeks ago.

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

I've actually watched Lee play.  It shouldn't take more than that.  He also did almost nothing in pass coverage the rest of his season.

The hollow victory is him proving that I don't have the weekly numbers, which I never actually claimed to have.  I do, however, understand how outliers affect a small sample size.

Meanwhile, if my point were wrong, he would easily just use the numbers against me, show me that Lee was good all year, and shut me up.  Instead, he's trying to prove I don't have the numbers at my disposal, which, I admit is true.  Instead, he apparently thinks proof of his point is that he said the same thing a few weeks ago.

Darron Lee is crap.  He had one monster game week 1 that inflated his PFF grade yay.  His backup actually played better at the end of the season

[ZachEY]

7 minutes ago, detectivekimble said:

You made the statement.  Back it up.

How about this... I'll buy the actual hard data from PFF, if you agree, beforehand, to bet $5,000 that his numbers don't decline meaningfully after week 1.  Max can hold the cash in escrow.

[detectivekimble]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

I've actually watched Lee play.  It shouldn't take more than that.  He also did almost nothing in pass coverage the rest of his season.

The hollow victory is him proving that I don't have the weekly numbers, which I never actually claimed to have.  I do, however, understand how outliers affect a small sample size.

Meanwhile, if my point were wrong, he would easily just use the numbers against me, show me that Lee was good all year, and shut me up.  Instead, he's trying to prove I don't have the numbers at my disposal, which, I admit is true.  Instead, he apparently thinks proof of his point is that he said the same thing a few weeks ago.

I don't think anything else needs to be said.  

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

23 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

Oh yeah he was suspended for DRUGS

 

My bad your boy Lee is a gem!

I am not waving the "Legalize Marijuana" banner but here's a point.  Firstly although it is a "DRUG" your implication is that he was doing Heroin or something of that sort.  The NFL is more than hypocritical in it's "DRUG" policy.  It cracks down on pot, while looking the other way in respect to HGH, Steroids and other "performance enhancing" drugs.  To  believe that these "supplements" don't still exist in the NFL is naïve, it's just that players and science have gotten better at staying ahead of the testing system to mask their presence.  300#-400 pound "behemoths" don't grow on trees, and I'm pretty sure milk, cookies and weightlifting will not get you there either. Painkiller usage and other opiate abuse is also rampant, I'm sure.  Because the need for players of this size and strength fits their business model, it's o.k.  Remember who we're dealing with here.  Darron Lee is undersized, foolish and was drafted above his talent level.  To make him out to be Aaron Hernandez or  "the sacred" Ray Lewis isn't fair.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

How about this... I'll buy the actual hard data from PFF, if you agree, beforehand, to bet $5,000 that his numbers don't decline meaningfully after week 1.  Max can hold the cash in escrow.

No offense to anybody involved here but if you can't see looming disaster with five figs riding on one of the mods having to make a ruling on semantics you're out of your mind.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Just now, detectivekimble said:

I don't think anything else needs to be said.  

I don't think this means what you think it means.

[BroadwayRay]

Just now, TeddEY said:

I've actually watched Lee play.  It shouldn't take more than that.  He also did almost nothing in pass coverage the rest of his season.

The hollow victory is him proving that I don't have the weekly numbers, which I never actually claimed to have.  I do, however, understand how outliers affect a small sample size.

Meanwhile, if my point were wrong, he would easily just use the numbers against me, show me that Lee was good all year, and shut me up.  Instead, he's trying to prove I don't have the numbers at my disposal, which, I admit is true.  Instead, he apparently thinks proof of his point is that he said the same thing a few weeks ago.

The eye test you're relying on rests solely interception and passes defended count, which means nothing. When you're really good at pass coverage, it is true that you do "nothing," because they don't throw to your covered man a whole lot. The best measure is a player's passer rating allowed. I'm going to guess Lee is among the best in the NFL in that category, so I don't feel the need to spend hundreds to get past PFF's paywall to find out.

[detectivekimble]

2 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

How about this... I'll buy the actual hard data from PFF, if you agree, beforehand, to bet $5,000 that his numbers don't decline meaningfully after week 1.  Max can hold the cash in escrow.

"Decline meaningfully"?  Yeah, that ambiguity will not end well.

And no, don't buy them.  I can post them later.

[detectivekimble]

1 minute ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

No offense to anybody involved here but if you can't see looming disaster with five figs riding on one of the mods having to make a ruling on semantics you're out of your mind.

That's what I was thinking.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

1 minute ago, BroadwayRay said:

I'm going to guess Lee is among the best in the NFL in that category, so I don't feel the need to spend hundreds to get past PFF's paywall to find out.

Please don't pretend that your aversion to being exposed to information that would be contrary to what you'd like to believe has anything to do with money.

[ZachEY]

6 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

No offense to anybody involved here but if you can't see looming disaster with five figs riding on one of the mods having to make a ruling on semantics you're out of your mind.

No way he takes it, so not really an issue.

[BroadwayRay]

1 minute ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

Please don't pretend that your aversion to being exposed to information that would be contrary to what you'd like to believe has anything to do with money.

I have no such fear. In fact, I'll bet you a Mr. Jet Potato Head that he's in the top 5 of linebackers in passer rating allowed (above a certain level of plays, of course). 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

2 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

I have no such fear. In fact, I'll bet you a Mr. Jet Potato Head that he's in the top 5 of linebackers in passer rating allowed (above a certain level of plays, of course). 

I'll bet you U.S. currency that top 5 linebackers in passer rating allowed above a certain level of plays isn't a real thing.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

3 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

No way he takes it, so not really an issue.

Do I get a crack at your action and convincing Max to adopt a strict textualist interpretation of the proposition offered?

[BroadwayRay]

1 minute ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

I'll bet you U.S. currency that top 5 linebackers in passer rating allowed above a certain level of plays isn't a real thing.

 

Can I send you my PayPal address?

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

2 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

 

Can I send you my PayPal address?

I have to admit I didn’t think I was gonna win that one on you not knowing how to count to five.

[BigRy56]

1 hour ago, TeddEY said:

So, if all goes well, 6-7 wins?

6-7 wins if the floor next year, if all doesn't go well IMO. Next season I will have us somewhere in between 8-10 wins after a big offseason and Darnold's year 2 leap.

[ZachEY]

5 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

Do I get a crack at your action and convincing Max to adopt a strict textualist interpretation of the proposition offered?

Obviously, if agreed, these terms would have to be collectively agreed upon in advance.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Just now, TeddEY said:

Obviously, if agreed, these terms would have to be collectively agreed upon in advance.

Joke's on you pal. We're talking about the Jets. It's all meaningless.

[RutgersJetFan]

So does Williams turn the bad players into good players or does he just not call the bad plays?

[GreenFish]

49 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

I'm comfortable with my statement as a fact.  Prove me wrong...

This statement is wrong. Pff normalizes outliers. So unlike simple averages, a players full year grade is not skewed by one week.

In the link below, pff goes into detail on its grading system. To quickly summarize, in order for a player to grade highly for the year, he would need to grade highly over a long period of time. 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-player-grades

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

2 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

This statement is wrong. Pff normalizes outliers. So unlike simple averages, a players full year grade is not skewed by one week.

In the link below, pff goes into detail in its grading system.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-player-grades

That's not what that means at all. Stop.

[GreenFish]

3 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

That's not what that means at all. Stop.

That’s not what What means? Please alloborate. 

[GreenFish]

9 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

That's not what that means at all. Stop.

Not sure you took the time to read the article. So here you go.

”Season-level grades aren’t simply an average of every game grade a player compiled over a season, but rather factor in the duration at which a player performed at that level. It is entirely possible that a player will have a season grade higher than any individual single game grade achieved, because playing well for an extended period of time is harder to do than for a short period”

So Lee’s high seasonal grade has more to do with his consistency throughout thre year than his performance is a specific game.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

4 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

Not sure you took the time to read the article. So here you go.

”Season-level grades aren’t simply an average of every game grade a player compiled over a season, but rather factor in the duration at which a player performed at that level. It is entirely possible that a player will have a season grade higher than any individual single game grade achieved, because playing well for an extended period of time is harder to do than for a short period”

So Lee’s high seasonal grade has more to do with his consistency throughout thre year than his performance is a specific game.

Okay. They give a bonus for consistency. Swell. That doesn't change anything EY said nor is that what normalization means.

[GreenFish]

18 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

Okay. They give a bonus for consistency. Swell. That doesn't change anything EY said nor is that what normalization means.

I don’t think you know much about pff.

TeddEY: “I don’t need to have the actual numbers to understand how one huge statistical outlier of a game effects a small data set”.

If you knew more about pff or read the article, you would understand why that statement is not correct. 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

30 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

I don’t think you know much about pff.

That's okay. Neither do you and neither does PFF. Reread what you copied from the article. An adjustment through which a season score on a scale is higher than any of the component game scores on the same scale is the opposite of normalized. It's fun arguing about things you don't understand, isn't it? You can just decide who wins based on your feelings!