JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 What does this even mean? The fact that the NFL didn't track individual sack leaders until 1982 doesn't diminish Deacon Jones. Sacks are pretty easy to track. Tracking something that almost happened, not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So then its not official. This is kind of useless argument and I'm pretty much over it already, but the article/stat is stupid because so many factors come into play. What if it was after a big penalty that negated a first? That attempt may have never happened. What if it was directly after a dropped pass by a WR, that would have been a first. That attempt may have never happened. What if the defender just covered a WR on 3 go routes and was gassed but couldnt come out because we were in a hurry up? I could keep going but I'm over it because I dont see the point in arguing something that almost happened. You do realize that any of those situations are applicable for conventional stats as well. Sanchez throws a td: What if the DB didn't fall down? What if the safety didn't miss his assignment? What if the play before the lb missed the tackle and the RB took it to the house? What if the LT didn't hold his block? What if we weren't playing the dulphins today? You'll have to do better then this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sacks are pretty easy to track. Tracking something that almost happened, not so much. What is the OL he was facing was injured? WHat if the QB didn't hold the ball so long? What if the OC called less pass plays? What if the run game was woring better, creating less third and longs? WHat if the secondary didn't cover so good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 You do realize that any of those situations are applicable for conventional stats as well. Sanchez throws a td: What if the DB didn't fall down? What if the safety didn't miss his assignment? What if the play before the lb missed the tackle and the RB took it to the house? What if the LT didn't hold his block? What if we weren't playing the dulphins today? You'll have to do better then this The only difference is, TD's are tracked because they happened...not almost happened. What is the OL he was facing was injured? WHat if the QB didn't hold the ball so long? What if the OC called less pass plays? What if the run game was woring better, creating less third and longs? WHat if the secondary didn't cover so good? See above, you're arguing with me about things that almost happened...not something that happened. The fact any of us have more than 2 posts in the this thread is sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 The only difference is, TD's are tracked because they happened...not almost happened. See above, you're arguing with me about things that almost happened...not something that happened. The fact any of us have more than 2 posts in the this thread is sad. Tackles/assists/sack credit are often judgement calls Stats Inc track dropped passes and sacks allowed, both are qutoed by nfl talking heads and both are judgement calls (also passes dropped is an "almost happenned".. I'm just trying to understand the line you draw where stats move from useful to "stupid" or whatever you are calling this one.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Are errors in baseball up for interpretation? LOL. Yeah, they are. That's why there is an official scorer at each game and he actually changes error calls during the game or even later. As to the article, "dropped interceptions" is a non-stat. With dropped passes the QB is intentionally throwing the ball at the receiver, who is trained to catch the ball, and for some reason the ball is dropped from his hands/chest, etc. With FO's "stat" we have to consider a defender, not trained to catch passes, being the unintended target and having to adjust to a play and then make a play. There are too many assumptions in order to say the DB should have made the interception. It's far easier to catch a pass as a receiver than it is to intercept it. The receiver & QB know where the ball is going. They know the route and distance. A DB has to guess and react in split second to make a play. Consider that Roddy White led the NFL in receptions with 115 while Ed Reed led the NFL in INTs with 8. To profer that there is such a stat as "dropped interceptions" is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Tackles/assists/sack credit are often judgement calls Stats Inc track dropped passes and sacks allowed, both are qutoed by nfl talking heads and both are judgement calls (also passes dropped is an "almost happenned".. I'm just trying to understand the line you draw where stats move from useful to "stupid" or whatever you are calling this one.. I would think "meaningless" would be apropos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Tackles/assists/sack credit are often judgement calls Stats Inc track dropped passes and sacks allowed, both are qutoed by nfl talking heads and both are judgement calls (also passes dropped is an "almost happenned".. I'm just trying to understand the line you draw where stats move from useful to "stupid" or whatever you are calling this one.. LOL. To equate "sacks allowed" to "dropped interceptions" it would have to be "almost sacks allowed." The sack actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Tackles/assists/sack credit are often judgement calls Stats Inc track dropped passes and sacks allowed, both are qutoed by nfl talking heads and both are judgement calls (also passes dropped is an "almost happenned".. I'm just trying to understand the line you draw where stats move from useful to "stupid" or whatever you are calling this one.. Tackles and sacks are judgement calls? Come'on bro, I think its pretty damn obvious who made what play, especially with instant replay. And I dont think dropped passes are an almost happened...it did happen. The ball was intended for said receiver, said receiver, dropped the pass. No pass is intended for a defender. My point is always that stats dont tell the whole truth. I just think trying to draw a conclusion about something that almost happened is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 It occurs to me that I can't even follow an argument anymore, much less participate in one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 stats are for fantasy geeks who gives a sh*t haters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 And I dont think dropped passes are an almost happened...it did happen. The ball was intended for said receiver, said receiver, dropped the pass. No pass is intended for a defender. My point is always that stats dont tell the whole truth. I just think trying to draw a conclusion about something that almost happened is stupid. dropped passes = happenned and dropped int's = almost happenned.. interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 LOL. To equate "sacks allowed" to "dropped interceptions" it would have to be "almost sacks allowed." The sack actually happened. Hey, wait a minute! Vernon Gholston's agent is looking forward to using that "almost sack" statistic as soon as the lockout is over. It means something to someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 dropped passes = happenned and dropped int's = almost happenned.. interesting Yep. Is a ball ever intended for a defender? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 LOL. To equate "sacks allowed" to "dropped interceptions" it would have to be "almost sacks allowed." The sack actually happened. square blockhead meets square hole http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/79827-i-guess-im-a-believer/page__p__1404284#entry1404284 There are many idiotic stats in the NFL. One is sacks allowed by OLineman (idiotic because it never takes into account assignments). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I would think "meaningless" would be apropos. it's only meaningless to those that aren't seriously interested in really understanding what's happenning on the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 square blockhead meets square hole http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/79827-i-guess-im-a-believer/page__p__1404284#entry1404284 I know that, ahole. Why don't you address the REAL POINT of my earlier post? To repeat: It's far easier to catch a pass as a receiver than it is to intercept it. The receiver & QB know where the ball is going. They know the route and distance. A DB has to guess and react in split second to make a play. Consider that Roddy White led the NFL in receptions with 115 while Ed Reed led the NFL in INTs with 8. The Pats led the NFL with 25 total INTs while the Colts led the NFL with 450 receptions. Yes, the best receiver caught 107 more passes than the best interceptor and the best receiving team caught 425 more passes than the best intercepting team. In no way can anyone reasonably assume, based on such a disparity, that an INT "should have" but wasn't made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I know that, ahole. Why don't you address the REAL POINT of my earlier post? To repeat: It's far easier to catch a pass as a receiver than it is to intercept it. The receiver & QB know where the ball is going. They know the route and distance. A DB has to guess and react in split second to make a play. Consider that Roddy White led the NFL in receptions with 115 while Ed Reed led the NFL in INTs with 8. The Pats led the NFL with 25 total INTs while the Colts led the NFL with 450 receptions. Yes, the best receiver caught 107 more passes than the best interceptor and the best receiving team caught 425 more passes than the best intercepting team. In no way can anyone reasonably assume, based on such a disparity, that an INT "should have" but wasn't made. FO can, and so can I.. I watch the game, and if it hits the defender in the hands I say, Oh, he dropped it. Ptetty simple actually Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 it's only meaningless to those that aren't seriously interested in really understanding what's happenning on the field Some of understand because we played the game and don't need to overanalyze stats to tell us what we just saw you condescending prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 FO can, and so can I.. I watch the game, and if it hits the defender in the hands I say, Oh, he dropped it. Ptetty simple actually and you know who else can? SMC can, when it's not a jet QB atleast http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70013-was-that-the-best-performance-by-a-qb-in-super-bowl-history/page__st__80__p__1164906#entry1164906 Do you discount Montana's game because he threw a game ending INT to the Bengals CB which was dropped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason423 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I dont think there is anything wrong with what FO is saying. You would have to be blind to not realize that Sanchez threw the ball to the other team alot last season. Its something he has to work on because most of the time a good deal of those passes would be intercepted since most were soft throws that a defender should pick. I do think two balanced out when he had the bogus int calls when Keller and I think JCo got stripped of the ball, but on the whole he made out better. My only beef is that I think FO tends to have an agenda with certain players/teams when they make a prediction on it. They went on record killing Sanchez when he came out. Then last year they went and took one data point among many to draw the conclusion that the best comparable to Sanchez was Russell. Its a comparison that had no merit and they run enough things there to know better than to write that down. But in the grand scheme of things Sanchez has been terribly inaccurate in his two years in the NFL. I dont think that is arguable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I dont think there is anything wrong with what FO is saying. You would have to be blind to not realize that Sanchez threw the ball to the other team alot last season. Its something he has to work on because most of the time a good deal of those passes would be intercepted since most were soft throws that a defender should pick. I do think two balanced out when he had the bogus int calls when Keller and I think JCo got stripped of the ball, but on the whole he made out better. My only beef is that I think FO tends to have an agenda with certain players/teams when they make a prediction on it. They went on record killing Sanchez when he came out. Then last year they went and took one data point among many to draw the conclusion that the best comparable to Sanchez was Russell. Its a comparison that had no merit and they run enough things there to know better than to write that down. But in the grand scheme of things Sanchez has been terribly inaccurate in his two years in the NFL. I dont think that is arguable. I believe thier AFC East game charter is a jets fan.. fwiw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 it's only meaningless to those that aren't seriously interested in really understanding what's happenning on the field This could be the lamest thing I've ever seen posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 FO can, and so can I.. I watch the game, and if it hits the defender in the hands I say, Oh, he dropped it. Ptetty simple actually I watch the game too and even if the ball hits the defender in the hands it doesn't mean he "dropped" it. It's only simple for dunces like you. Consider that the Pats led the NFL with 25 INTs total, that's still 231 LESS than the worst receiving team in the NFL, the Panthers, who had 256 total receptions. Probability is the essence of FO's "stat." If an INT is incredibly harder to do than a reception, then we can't use a stat saying something "should have happened." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 This could be the lamest thing I've ever seen posted. And Klacko http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/95924-steelers-ravens-game/page__st__80__p__1762362#entry1762362 I forgot, the only drops that Sanchez throws that mean anything are the dropped picks. Flacco's dropped picks, of which he threw four today, get ignored. And Jifiot http://www.jetnation.com/forums/index.php?/topic/93485-kerry-rhodes-lmao/page__p__1709778#entry1709778 He's missed 1 game but it might as well be 6. He's barely visible on the field. He's dropped a couple of INT's though...so thats good. Its a shame because I was actually thinking he'd be a good addition. Maybe he's struggling with picking up the D, I know its complex especially for safeties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 This could be the lamest thing I've ever seen posted. Are FO's stats perfect? No, but you are kidding yourself if decisions aren't being made based on them (or ones like them). Teams go way deeper then this btw, I think both Mangini and Ryan have said QB's are graded on eveyr pass, if you don't think they look down on a pass winding up in a defenders hands, you are crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Lol.. this is the lead story on dustn keller's web site http://dustinkeller81.com/ what a turd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 and rex ryan "It was good. No turnovers out there. A good thing on offense, a bad thing on defense. I think (the defense) dropped like five balls. Hopefully the defense, this afternoon, if they get the opportunity they can come up with them." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Lol.. this is the lead story on dustn keller's web site http://dustinkeller81.com/ what a turd Somebody is providing newsfeeds for him for his site. His people (or whoever is doing this for him) are not smart enough to realize that every story they put up there may not reflect well. Ultimately, he is the dumbass that allowed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 and rex ryan "It was good. No turnovers out there. A good thing on offense, a bad thing on defense. I think (the defense) dropped like five balls. Hopefully the defense, this afternoon, if they get the opportunity they can come up with them." Didn't he say something about Gholston having his balls drop too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 My final stats: There were 527 TOTAL INTs thrown in the NFL last year. There were 10,185 total receptions last year. The Colts and Saints each had 450 receptions as a team, 77 less than the total INTs thrown by every QB in the NFL last year. For every INT there was 19 receptions. For FOs' "stat" to be accurate about Sanchez (or any other QB) that means he should have had 285 more dropped passes. It's an absurd number because "dropped interceptions" is an absurd "stat." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 My final stats: There were 527 TOTAL INTs thrown in the NFL last year. There were 10,185 total receptions last year. The Colts and Saints each had 450 receptions as a team, 77 less than the total INTs thrown by every QB in the NFL last year. For every INT there was 19 receptions. For FOs' "stat" to be accurate about Sanchez (or any other QB) that means he should have had 285 more dropped passes. It's an absurd number because "dropped interceptions" is an absurd "stat." i honestly have no idea what point you think your making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 i honestly have no idea what point you think your making For you, that's understandable. I'll make it simple: statistically speaking, an INT is 19 times harder to achieve than a reception and, thus, you can't assume that an INT should have been made just as we assume a reception should have been made. Based on statistics, a DB SHOULDN'T catch every ball that hits him in the hands just like a batter shouldn't get a hit every time he makes contact and puts the ball in play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 For you, that's understandable. I'll make it simple: statistically speaking, an INT is 19 times harder to achieve than a reception and, thus, you can't assume that an INT should have been made just as we assume a reception should have been made. Based on statistics, a DB SHOULDN'T catch every ball that hits him in the hands just like a batter shouldn't get a hit every time he makes contact and puts the ball in play. wow.. that's even dumber then i thought it was. ok, congrats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 wow.. that's even dumber then i thought it was. ok, congrats! Only for a stat geek who's never stepped foot on a football field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.