Jump to content

Need an ESPN Insider... Divergent Paths for Greene, Sanchez


ZachEY
 Share

Recommended Posts

a) If you were even slightly familiar with there stuff you'd know they definitely watch the games

B) Adding environment into the discussion just makes Sanchez look worse

My own opinion is that Sanchez being able to be on a winner will go along way towards his development. He basically gets to learn by playing and not have his confidence crushed in the process.

Do you think Sanchez is playing well right now?

And I dont see how they watch the games. To compare Sanchez to Russell is just beyond stupid.

Then to compare Greene to guys that all tore their ACL the next season like it means anything is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being wrong and then correcting is part of the scientific process.

Histrionics aside, I'm sure you'd have been much better off living 2000 years ago when life expectancy was less then half of what it is now..

At least I wouldn't have to deal with 20 years of heart attacks, senility, Alzheimers, adult diapers and old folks homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In baseball when they use these formulas to compare players it is just silly.

In football, it is downright stupid.

These things are developed for people who can not articulate performance with their eyes.

Often times in baseball your eyes can lie. Espeically over a 162 game season.

However, to bring this into football, where watching the games is the only way to judge a player it doesnt work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but you'd be dead @25-30

I'm very happy for the scientific invention of indoors. It's awesome. I'm still not going to elevate science to the status of God. You can worship at the altar of science all you know. I will appreciate it while understanding it's limitations. Also have a little fun with the philosophy of science. Cool stuff. My first point about the majority of science being false or false science is still accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think Sanchez is playing well right now?

And I dont see how they watch the games. To compare Sanchez to Russell is just beyond stupid.

Then to compare Greene to guys that all tore their ACL the next season like it means anything is absurd.

He's playing well in comparison to how awful he played during the season. He's playing well considering he's a rookie. He's not playing well though when compared to upper echelon types of QB's.. And i suspect that we'll all see that the minute we face a team (like Minn) that can shut down our running game without overselling on it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In baseball when they use these formulas to compare players it is just silly.

In football, it is downright stupid.

These things are developed for people who can not articulate performance with their eyes.

In baseball it makes sense. Individuals doing individual things can be quantified. It's easy to quantify that a guy got X amount of hits in Y amount of plate appearances. It's easy to figure out that a pitcher strikes out X amount of guys per inning.

Football on the other hand...it's to convoluted.

99% of people can't articulate performance ACCURATELY with their eyes.

I'm really disappointed in the FO guys on this because this is very ESPN-y. It's built to shock you rather than inform you.

Edited by SenorGato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's playing well in comparison to how awful he played during the season. He's playing well considering he's a rookie. He's not playing well though when compared to upper echelon types of QB's.. And i suspect that we'll all see that the minute we face a team (like Minn) that can shut down our running game without overselling on it..

Sanchez will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CTM, what's with the science debate?

You're making the false assumption that the author used the proper scientific methodology, when he didn't.

And, Arsis, science isn't "wrong" more often than it is right. Science screws up when the wrong scientific methodology is used.

Back to CTM, the author compared Sanchez's rookie year with other 1st year starters regardless of whether that 1st year starting came rookie year or in the 4th year.

Thus, the author compared Sanchez's year to Russell's 2nd year in the NFL (Russell didn't start his rookie year, but did play in December). FBO disregarded Russell's rookie year since that was not the 1st year he was started. Thus, FBO also disregarded Eli's rookie year since he didn't start the year as the starter.

So, CTM, do you believe that was proper methodology?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CTM, what's with the science debate?

You're making the false assumption that the author used the proper scientific methodology, when he didn't.

And, Arsis, science isn't "wrong" more often than it is right. Science screws up when the wrong scientific methodology is used.

Back to CTM, the author compared Sanchez's rookie year with other 1st year starters regardless of whether that 1st year starting came rookie year or in the 4th year.

Thus, the author compared Sanchez's year to Russell's 2nd year in the NFL (Russell didn't start his rookie year, but did play in December). FBO disregarded Russell's rookie year since that was not the 1st year he was started. Thus, FBO also disregarded Eli's rookie year since he didn't start the year as the starter.

So, CTM, do you believe that was proper methodology?

You can't cherry pick. You're creating one of the problems of scientific demarcation on a smaller scale. What is science and what is not science? Also, what is the proper scientific method? The ideal of science is much better than the practice of science. Especially the blind faith people put into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Jets make the Super Bowl, Sanchez's career can bottom out worse than Christian Slater's did and I'd still love that little Mexican bastard.

I don't know if you get or lose points on the christian slater career reference, but you definitely get them for "that little mexican bastard"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

except he's not an espn writer. He's a writer for Football Outsiders.

They use stats and stats only to analyze. What they miss is JaMarcus Russell's team did not have a killer rush offense and a killer D. Sanchez is "managing the game." ala Trent Dilfer because they know they can win this way. He's a rookie. He doesn't have any weapons that can stretch the field (well he has one, but that one can't catch).

This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball players can be statistically compared much more easily than football players because it is a sport which basically is one where individual are isolated one on one. Pitcher v. hitter, field against ball whic is certainly an oversimplification. Football, on the other hand, requires a team effort-no quarterback is going to look good if he is flat on his back because of an ineffective O line or have a high completion percentage if his ends can't catch or get open.

Sanchez was a starter after 16 college games-how many did Russell have? As previously stated Russell was a second year player having had a year to absorb the defenses, the playbook and practices with the players.

It is my observation that most of Sanchez' ints were the result of his inexperience in that they were thrown a fraction too late or because he failed to recognize the coverage and where the DBs were or because his youthful enthusiasm which caused him to try to force the play. Part of it also may be the early success giving him a false sense of security.

While i was against handing him the ball from the start, it turned out to be the right move. We are NOT looking at a Russell here.

Edited by TheSage
typos
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball players can be statistically compared much more easily than football players because it is a sport which basically is one where individual are isolated one on one. Pitcher v. hitter, field against ball whic is certainly an oversimplification. Football, on the other hand, requires a team effort-no quarterback is going to look good if he is flat on his back because of an ineffective O line or have a high completion percentage if his ends can't catch or get open.

Sanchez was a starter after 16 college games-how many did Russell have? As previously stated Russell was a second year player having had a year to absorb the defenses, the playbook and practices with the players.

It is my observation that most of Sanchez' ints were the result of his inexperience in that they were thrown a fraction too late or because he failed to recognize the coverage and where the DBs were or because his youthful enthusiasm which caused him to try to force the play. Part of it also may be the early success giving him a false sense of security.

While i was against handing him the ball from the start, it turned out to be the right move. We are NOT looking at a Russell here.

+1

also, the sample sizes are much larger in baseball than in football which greatly increases the confidence level of stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to Brandon Teirney this morning and Football Outsiders also had a thesis about rookie RB's who have done what Shonn Greene has done in the playoffs-there were 3 of them and it said 2 of them blew out their knees the next year-the third was Duane Thomas....hater much? Klecko73 said it best the other day when he noted that the reason they call it Football Outsiders is because they all look like this guy

john-clayton.png

Edited by SoFlaJets
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball players can be statistically compared much more easily than football players because it is a sport which basically is one where individual are isolated one on one. Pitcher v. hitter, field against ball whic is certainly an oversimplification. Football, on the other hand, requires a team effort-no quarterback is going to look good if he is flat on his back because of an ineffective O line or have a high completion percentage if his ends can't catch or get open.

Sanchez was a starter after 16 college games-how many did Russell have? As previously stated Russell was a second year player having had a year to absorb the defenses, the playbook and practices with the players.

It is my observation that most of Sanchez' ints were the result of his inexperience in that they were thrown a fraction too late or because he failed to recognize the coverage and where the DBs were or because his youthful enthusiasm which caused him to try to force the play. Part of it also may be the early success giving him a false sense of security.

While i was against handing him the ball from the start, it turned out to be the right move. We are NOT looking at a Russell here.

Not for nothing, but you spent a lot of energy explaining why football is harder to quantify due to all the moving parts working together, then went on to conclude Sanchez isn't Russell, ignoring that either by statistics (Defensive or running game), or just plain old eyeballing it, Russell has been in a a tremendously more difficult environment to succeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not for nothing, but you spent a lot of energy explaining why football is harder to quantify due to all the moving parts working together, then went on to conclude Sanchez isn't Russell, ignoring that either by statistics (Defensive or running game), or just plain old eyeballing it, Russell has been in a a tremendously more difficult environment to succeed.

Russell has also made it harder on himself by not putting forth the effort. Does anybody think that will ever be an issue with Sanchez?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to Brandon Teirney this morning and Football Outsiders also had a thesis about rookie RB's who have done what Shonn Greene has done in the playoffs-there were 3 of them and it said 2 of them blew out their knees the next year-the third was Duane Thomas....hater much? Klecko73 said it best the other day when he noted that the reason they call it Football Outsiders is because they all look like this guy

john-clayton.png

It's in this article:

Greene, meanwhile, is only the fifth rookie to post two 100-yard games in the playoffs. Coincidentally, three of the other four men to pull this off -- Jamal Lewis, Curt Warner and Ickey Woods -- tore their ACLs the next season, and combined to play only three games in their sophomore seasons. The fourth, Duane Thomas, saw a promising career ruined by contract squabbles with the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to Brandon Teirney this morning and Football Outsiders also had a thesis about rookie RB's who have done what Shonn Greene has done in the playoffs-there were 3 of them and it said 2 of them blew out their knees the next year-the third was Duane Thomas....hater much? Klecko73 said it best the other day when he noted that the reason they call it Football Outsiders is because they all look like this guy

john-clayton.png

I don't think that was a prediction as much a coincidence they made mention of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russell has also made it harder on himself by not putting forth the effort. Does anybody think that will ever be an issue with Sanchez?

How the heck do I know? the only things i've seen out of sanchez off the field has been either modeling, shooting commercials or playing xbox at that dirtbag rhodes house..

note: i'm not attacking sanchez, just defending FO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

note: i'm not attacking sanchez, just defending FO

How can you defend FO in this instance, however?

FO is comparing Sanchez' rookie season to Russell's SECOND year in the NFL (Russell didn't start his rookie year) and every other 1st time starter, regardless of whether it's in his rookie year or 4th year.

In other words, FO disregarded Eli Manning's rookie season where he started 8 games, but instead matched up Eli's 2nd year to Sanchez' first. The same is true with Phillip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers.

So, again, I ask you, did FO use proper methodology in this instance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball players can be statistically compared much more easily than football players because it is a sport which basically is one where individual are isolated one on one. Pitcher v. hitter, field against ball whic is certainly an oversimplification. Football, on the other hand, requires a team effort-no quarterback is going to look good if he is flat on his back because of an ineffective O line or have a high completion percentage if his ends can't catch or get open.

Sanchez was a starter after 16 college games-how many did Russell have? As previously stated Russell was a second year player having had a year to absorb the defenses, the playbook and practices with the players.

It is my observation that most of Sanchez' ints were the result of his inexperience in that they were thrown a fraction too late or because he failed to recognize the coverage and where the DBs were or because his youthful enthusiasm which caused him to try to force the play. Part of it also may be the early success giving him a false sense of security.

While i was against handing him the ball from the start, it turned out to be the right move. We are NOT looking at a Russell here.

People think that baseball stats should be compared more qualitatively, but if in fact that is not the case either. But that is not the argument here.

People can and do twist facts and numbers to fit any agenda they like to espouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...