Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Top to Bottom


  • Please log in to reply
118 replies to this topic

#106 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,737 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 June 2013 - 04:35 PM

They had an easier schedule. They just didn't hav to score much to win in their 11 wins.

 

That was my point.  A team could be 10-6 like Chicago and be better than Indy who finished 11-5 because they played in different conferences.  But if you only looked at wins or losses you would assume Indy was better.  Hence why i said wins and losses are not the only or best judge of who is a better or worse team unless you are talking about the extremes.



#107 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,737 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 June 2013 - 05:03 PM

I had no better or worse criteria so your first paragraph has nothing to do with the discussion. I didn't say you can determine best or worse based solely on wins either.

 

A bad record, and having all 3 parts of the team ranked low in points means you're a bad team. Playing well the last 6 games doesn't change the bad first 10. Last season the team was bad, everything supports that.

 

Rankings compare teams to their competition. If you are worse than most of your competition, you're bad. You may be a little worse than the competition or you may be a lot, doesn't change that you're bad.
 

You talk in circles.  You say winning determines if you are good or bad.  So using your logic a 7-9 team is bad yet a 9-7 team by extension must be good.  Then you said earlier that rankings aren't important but just said if your ranking are in the bottom of the league then you are bad suggesting they are important.  Which one is it? You ignored the whole point of the discussion which was that using rankings without knowing the range of the data set or how much separates teams from one another results in perceived differences that aren't there.  We assume the first ranked team and the second ranked team are both very good while the 10th ranked team is not nearly as good as either of the other two. But if the difference between the 1st ranked team and the second ranked team was 10 points a game and the difference between the 2nd ranked team and the 10th ranked team was 2 points, then the perceived difference between the 10th ranked team and the second ranked team would be small but the difference between the top two would be huge.

By using an all or nothing criteria like winning or losing, the fact that you don't have a better or worse criteria is a flaw.  You don't differentiate between a 0-16 team and a 7-9 team instead calling them both bad because they had losing seasons and that is ridiculous.  Of course there is a big difference between the 2 .  Then you say that we ranked low in all categories and I already pointed out that rankings for points between 10th and 20th for example had a small range of 2 points one way or the other essentially making your ranking distinction useless.  By your notion, being 14th which is in the top half of the league is okay but ranking 18th is bad because it is in the lower half of the league yet the difference is a point a game or perhaps 2 touchdowns over the course of a season.

Finally rankings aren't comparing you to every team on an absolute basis because you don't play every other team and different divisions can make a huge difference in how hard or easy your schedule is compared to other teams and how you rank to each other.  So again your whole logic is serious flawed and very simplistic in nature.  Saying it over and over doesn't make it any better it simply reinforces the notion that you don't have a clue or you are too concrete to understand the obvious differences.

 

I am not saying I don't like the way things are done simply that in order to make sense of stats and rankings you have to understand how they are derived and their limitations rather to assume a concrete simplistic approach as you appear to do.  Winning is the main thing that counts and points for and points against are  the way that happens but to use terms like bad and good when describing rankings and records really is inaccurate unless you are talking about the extremes.



#108 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Member from WAAAYY Back

  • ALL-PRO
  • 3,363 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 13 June 2013 - 05:27 PM

your posting speaks for itself. it's obvious you've invested a lot of time and energy rationalizing in your head that this team is better than it actually is, while given no indication that things are actually going to change. no you don't need pro bowlers at every position but for the ones you don't you at least need competent, reliable players in general (ex. minter) and godfrey's never proven in 5 seasons to even be competent or shown consistency. mike mitchell was overdrafted like 5 rounds because the raiders scouting staff is retarded. i feel good about a lot of positions on the team. safety is definitely not one of them and unlike you i'm not afraid to admit it

Reading your posts are ALWAYS negative so I take your negativity with a grain of salt.

 

I am done arguing with someone that only sees thing in a negative light.

 

Have a nice day.



#109 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Member from WAAAYY Back

  • ALL-PRO
  • 3,363 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 13 June 2013 - 05:44 PM

 

Can you clarify if A.H stands for A$$hole or A$$hat? I like A$$hat better. If you want, I can play this game all day. I have time to Google "DaveThePanther2008 prediction" and the results are fantabulous.

 

Oh look!......

 

DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

Superior Member

  • photo-1084.gif?_r=1360063707
  • HUDDLER
  • bullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.png
  • 1,915 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 28 April 2011 - 10:09 PM

I am of the belief that Newton will NOT start at all in 2011. However, I replied to a post on FB and it blew up. So I thought I would get the Huddles opinion.
 

And so defiant, so angry:

 

DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

Superior Member

  • photo-1084.gif?_r=1360063707
  • HUDDLER
  • bullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.pngbullet_black.png
  • 1,915 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:59 PM

caddieman said


He will start but not in 2011 and if by chance he starts in 2011 it will be because he is ready and at minimum 1/2 way into the season.

As far as Morons go you only have to look into the mirror. Your hapless knowledge about Newton or what he has to learn before becoming the starting QB is very clear.

So do me a big favor...and take a long walk off a short pier. and as the Great Buford T. Justice Said ""F__K OFF""

 

 Really searching hard you.

 

You pick what 3 of 4 days after the NFL Draft?  No OTAs or Minicamps in sight.  Based on the future, I would say that was a pretty good assessment.  While I was wrong it was a valid point.  And I also believe that changed well before we actually started playing.  After Cam had time to work with IMG.

 

I am proud of you.  You are so intelligent that you can search.  Wow, may  I have your autograph.

 

FF

 

Once again,

 

You pick and choose three or four.  Cute

 

How many did you come across where I was right.  Once again.

 

3 or 4 doesn't make a majority.

 

I don't give a poo whether you search all day or not. 

 

I know my record on topics I discuss.  I try to be more optimistic and not so negative but I have also stood my ground when I know I am right.



#110 C47

C47

    89...Panther for Life...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,233 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 06:17 PM

So it is perfectly, realistic and rational, for you to see things in terms of worst case scenario. But I cannot looks at things from a best case scenario?Well, now that I am learning all these interwebz rules, I don't think I like this game.


I'm seeing things from the way they've been consistently the past five seasons....

#111 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 13 June 2013 - 06:35 PM

I'm seeing things from the way they've been consistently the past five seasons....


Skirt the issue. Well played.

From your, somewhat skewed, point of view. You can't go wrong. You are like my dog, he thinks he is smarter than he really is too.

Kids. If you can think it, it must be true. Good to see some things never change.

#112 C47

C47

    89...Panther for Life...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,233 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 07:28 PM

Skirt the issue. Well played.

From your, somewhat skewed, point of view. You can't go wrong. You are like my dog, he thinks he is smarter than he really is too.

Kids. If you can think it, it must be true. Good to see some things never change.

 

How is it skirting the issue when I'm making an observation based on what the actual results have been for five years now regarding our safety play?  Please enlighten me since I'm no smarter then your dog.  While you're right that we are both assuming opposite outcomes, you're missing one little important key piece that I have actual factual results over a lengthy period of time to support mine.  You have jack poo other than what you HOPE will happen.  Guess what, we hope the same things bud, I'm just not going to expect it till Godfrey, Naka or any other safety shows me things have changed from the last five seasons.  For fugs sake lets throw the intelligence insults out of this, I have no clue who you are, and you have no clue who I am.  So I doubt you really have any clue what I know, or don't know....



#113 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,418 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 07:43 PM

Reading your posts are ALWAYS negative so I take your negativity with a grain of salt.

 

I am done arguing with someone that only sees thing in a negative light.

 

Have a nice day.

 

lol go put your head in the sand.... admirable gesture



#114 chef17

chef17

    Senior Asshole

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,503 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 08:26 PM

You talk in circles.  You say winning determines if you are good or bad.  So using your logic a 7-9 team is bad yet a 9-7 team by extension must be good.  Then you said earlier that rankings aren't important but just said if your ranking are in the bottom of the league then you are bad suggesting they are important.  Which one is it? You ignored the whole point of the discussion which was that using rankings without knowing the range of the data set or how much separates teams from one another results in perceived differences that aren't there.  We assume the first ranked team and the second ranked team are both very good while the 10th ranked team is not nearly as good as either of the other two. But if the difference between the 1st ranked team and the second ranked team was 10 points a game and the difference between the 2nd ranked team and the 10th ranked team was 2 points, then the perceived difference between the 10th ranked team and the second ranked team would be small but the difference between the top two would be huge.

By using an all or nothing criteria like winning or losing, the fact that you don't have a better or worse criteria is a flaw.  You don't differentiate between a 0-16 team and a 7-9 team instead calling them both bad because they had losing seasons and that is ridiculous.  Of course there is a big difference between the 2 .  Then you say that we ranked low in all categories and I already pointed out that rankings for points between 10th and 20th for example had a small range of 2 points one way or the other essentially making your ranking distinction useless.  By your notion, being 14th which is in the top half of the league is okay but ranking 18th is bad because it is in the lower half of the league yet the difference is a point a game or perhaps 2 touchdowns over the course of a season.

Finally rankings aren't comparing you to every team on an absolute basis because you don't play every other team and different divisions can make a huge difference in how hard or easy your schedule is compared to other teams and how you rank to each other.  So again your whole logic is serious flawed and very simplistic in nature.  Saying it over and over doesn't make it any better it simply reinforces the notion that you don't have a clue or you are too concrete to understand the obvious differences.

 

I am not saying I don't like the way things are done simply that in order to make sense of stats and rankings you have to understand how they are derived and their limitations rather to assume a concrete simplistic approach as you appear to do.  Winning is the main thing that counts and points for and points against are  the way that happens but to use terms like bad and good when describing rankings and records really is inaccurate unless you are talking about the extremes.

 

Nowhere did I say rankings weren't important. This really serves no purpose to keep going back and forth so I'll just ask this and be done. If you can't use a bad record combined with an offense scoring less points than the competition, a defense giving up more than the competition, and a bad special teams unit, then how would you determine what makes a team bad?

 



#115 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,737 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 June 2013 - 08:56 PM

Nowhere did I say rankings weren't important. This really serves no purpose to keep going back and forth so I'll just ask this and be done. If you can't use a bad record combined with an offense scoring less points than the competition, a defense giving up more than the competition, and a bad special teams unit, then how would you determine what makes a team bad?

You are right there is no point in going back and forth. Your question shows that nothing I have said made any impact on you. You are still using the same simplistic logic to ask your question. As my sig says I can explain it to you as I have but I can't understand it for you as well. Perhaps we can discuss something less abstract or complex like how you liked what Smitty said tonight in the interview. That doesn't require much thought or understanding of multidimentional concepts.

#116 C47

C47

    89...Panther for Life...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,233 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 08:58 PM

 Really searching hard you.

 

You pick what 3 of 4 days after the NFL Draft?  No OTAs or Minicamps in sight.  Based on the future, I would say that was a pretty good assessment.  While I was wrong it was a valid point.  And I also believe that changed well before we actually started playing.  After Cam had time to work with IMG.

 

I am proud of you.  You are so intelligent that you can search.  Wow, may  I have your autograph.

 

FF

 

Once again,

 

You pick and choose three or four.  Cute

 

How many did you come across where I was right.  Once again.

 

3 or 4 doesn't make a majority.

 

I don't give a poo whether you search all day or not. 

 

I know my record on topics I discuss.  I try to be more optimistic and not so negative but I have also stood my ground when I know I am right.

 

Let's see your scoreboard then since you're obviously so obsessed with stroking your ego that you keep track of your hits and misses....



#117 chef17

chef17

    Senior Asshole

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,503 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 09:02 PM

You are right there is no point in going back and forth. Your question shows that nothing I have said made any impact on you. You are still using the same simplistic logic to ask your question. As my sig says I can explain it to you as I have but I can't understand it for you as well. Perhaps we can discuss something less abstract or complex like how you liked what Smitty said tonight in the interview. That doesn't require much thought or understanding of multidimentional concepts.

 

Most of what you said isn't relevant. Half of it is talking about determining who is better or worse which has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. I understand everything you said, but when you are arguing that being bad at the entire point of your job, ya know scoring points and not allowing points to win games, then it begs the question how would you determine who is bad. You can't answer that's fine. I'll agree to disagree and we can move on



#118 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,737 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 June 2013 - 09:18 PM

Most of what you said isn't relevant. Half of it is talking about determining who is better or worse which has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. I understand everything you said, but when you are arguing that being bad at the entire point of your job, ya know scoring points and not allowing points to win games, then it begs the question how would you determine who is bad. You can't answer that's fine. I'll agree to disagree and we can move on

As I said before in order to agree to disagree we need to be on the level of understanding regarding what we are even discussing.  Obviously you discount everything I said which is all I need to know.  It is  throwing pearls before swine. You obviously have no appreciation or understanding of what I am saying so I won't waste my time. Can I answer that question and a million more?  Of course. Ask an intelligent question and I will respond in kind.  Until then, get in the last word and smuggly believe you have won some kind of debate.



#119 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,418 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 10:43 PM

so dave if you're done PMSing about people having legitimate reservations about certain positions on the team and want to talk again let's discuss Armanti "Steal of the 2010 draft" Edwards and where he fits into the WR competition where I understand there are so many 4th string difference makers according to the OP




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com