Mr. Scot

I wouldn't say "called out" given that you focused on an accusation but haven't even attempted to answer the substance of my statements about how unreliable stats can be. I can focus it a little closer if you like... Should and interception that happens because a receiver made a poor attempt at a catch and deflected it to a defended reflect negatively on the quarterback who threw a perfectly good pass?

Pretty much my take... Mind you, I'm iffy on Bryce proving to be a consistent starter as well.

Yeah...no to Shedeur does not equal "nobody over Bryce".

Lots of irony here...

If Murray comes back, we can talk. And dude, a guy who's watched every Arizona game gave you a whole list of things to talk about and you responded with no substance at all. Just basically, "well you're wrong because...stats"

Being benched and on the verge of let go may not be "statistical" but I assure you it matters.

The league demonstrated their view by not drafting him.

Nope, but I do see it happen a lot. Again, it's why I don't bother with them.

I don't think I watched that video

One being done publicly while the other was done privately doesn't really make it any better. It's still basically saying "I deserve better than this", and it gives people a really bad taste in their mouths. Not only did the league disagree, but they took a rather dim view of the whole episode...and rightly so. As to highlight reel plays, I xould put together a highlight reel of Bryce that would make him look like the best thing going. But once you saw him play a full game, you'd know the truth. Hell, guys like Ryan Leaf, Michael Vick and Rex Grossman could put out great highlight reels. You just had to kinda look away when they did the...other stuff Bottom Line for me, if I were giving Sanders career advice right now, I can tell you what my first suggestions would be: - Tell your dad to sit down, shut up and butt out. - Likewise, find yourself an agent that has absolutely nothing to do with Deion or any of his close associates - Also sign up with a QB coach that'll always tell you the unvarnished truth, not just say how great you are To sum it up, ggo out there and make it or break it without your famous father's influence, comments or his very public presence. I doubt that happens, but I don't doubt that it might be the best thing for him.

I'm not cherry picking metrics. I'm ignoring all of them. There are things about a player that stats are never gonna tell you. And there are things you might think stats tell you that are actually wrong. We've been talking about Howell so I looked up his stats for last season with Seattle. In the two games where he played, he had a completion percentage under 36 percent and his overall quarterback rating was in the mid teens. Should I consider those things valid for evaluative purposes?

This board has those issues sometimes...

I remember the song. Just not sure if there's something I'm missing as to how it got applied to our backfield. Was it just somebody's random example of a "Double Trouble" type nickname?

David Carr has better stats than a lot of guys when he played. Hell, when we got him one of the big talking points was that he had the best completion percentage in the entire league. Still didn't work out so well. Are there stats that measure field vision? Not really. You can try to apply stats to argue for it but it's all extrapolation. I go back to what I've said before as far as individual stats in a team game. ... Statement: "Quarterback X has lousy completion percentage." Question: How good are his receivers? ... Statement: "Quarterback X hasnt thrown for more than 200 yards in a single game this year." Question: Does his team have a run heavy scheme or a phenomenally effective run game? ... Statement: "Quarterback X has thrown for 3000 yards this season." Question: How many of those yards came after the catch? ... Statement: "Quarterback X didn't throw a pass further than ten yards last game." Question: But did he put the ball in good spots for his receivers to catch it and run for good gains? ... There are hundreds of examples like this, examples that apply to just about every measurable there is in the game. One of the things I have always loved about football is the incredible complexity of the game. But that complexity makes player evaluation all that much more difficult and means that dependence on "simple metrics" just isn't something you can hold in high priority.

Stats can be deceiving. And in football especially they rarely tell the whole story. I'm always gonna trust my eyes over a stat sheet.

Bad team overall perhaps... ...but I'm not so sure I'd put our skill players (other than McMillan) and our MASH unit of an OL over theirs right now.

You have my sympathy for having to watch those games As far as the evaluations, I think a lot of times it's just assumed that someone who has better stats is better in areas like these Again though, I don't care about stats. I don't even look at them outside discussions like this.

Football quarterback is universally considered one of the hardest positions in all of sports to evaluate. Even knowledgeable guys make the wrong choice plenty of times (see: Beathard, Robert) As far as Shedeur, I don't think he's gonna be a great NFL player, but when you get right down to it unless he plays for us (or directly against us) I don't really give a sh-t.

Double Dutch?

Figured it has to be because it's so insane a thing to have happen. That's like tracking whether a guy has ever fumbled by faceplanting in a teammate'a ass.

I did. I kinda hoped we'd pick him up. Being Bryce's backup wouldn't have been a bad situation for him (and certainly could have been good for us). What hurts though is understanding that we didn't so much pick Bryce over him as we did Andy Dalton

He's not really getting much of a choice at the moment. But on this we agree. I think he deserves a chance, and I'd be more than happy to see him get one here.

Yeah, I wouldn't call being a choker "a minor disadvantage". That's kind of a big deal (ditto the durability issues) Basically, Murray is inconsistent, lousy under pressure, has lingering questions about his leadership/ work ethic and yes, isn't espresso durable. Those aren't the kinds of things that necessarily show up on a stat sheet, but they do show up.

I'd sign up for that. Some NFL teams probably would too but others obviously wouldn't or he'd have been drafted higher. I don't really know enough about his durability to say how long a career he could have, though.

I think he got a raw deal there too but don't know enough about his attitude or demeanor to comment. Definitely agree. And yeah, he fits what Canales does. I know the team wouldn't bring him in with the idea of him competing for a starting job, but stuff happens.