PNW_PantherMan

Its crazy football is the most risky to your health but doesn't have guaranteed contracts. Baseball is is the easiest on your body and you get stuff like this... https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/40430232/bobby-bonilla-day-2024-new-york-mets-pay-119-million-every-july-1-ohtani-contract-deferred-money

He's a good fit for the way the team likes to play

His floor is probably a 3rd liner. He has a lot of skill with the puck too. He could become a good top 6 forward.

Lol Stankoven is our little Marchand Jr.

Lame. Oh well we got 1 on the road.

yeaaaa boy

Lucky to be down 1. We can do eeet.

Orlov with the Waterboy tackle lol

bruh

The national TV announcers suck right now. I miss Doc Emerick.

If there's a game you can play around with, it's probably this one. We already got our road win. Would be cool to see Nikishin.

Sure but stats with a subjective basis should be treated differently than stats with an objective basis. The issue is that football as a sport is difficult to objectively quantify when it comes to individual performance. Individual stats are the best we have, but as we all know they don't tell the whole story. In baseball they do basically tell the whole story. The team's output is a sum of everyone's individual output. In football it's much blurier. So I think there's a lot of analytical voodoo that's done to try and make up for that gap.

The rise of analytics in sports goes back to the use of sabermetrics in baseball. The ironic thing is that the whole point of Bill James work was to objectively figure out each players contribution to to a team's wins throughout the season. This is possible in baseball because each at bat is essentially a 1v1 with an objective outcome. Applying statistical averages also works a lot better with hundreds of plate appearances over 162 games a year. PFF grades plays subjectively, and then puts them into buckets. They then create different statistics based on those buckets. That's all well and good and I'm not saying it's useless. But calling it analytics like it's some kind of objective science is a far cry from what is actually going on.

I thought he looked really slow out there for us. I haven't followed him closely throughout his career, but he seemed pretty washed to me. I know his PFF grades and stuff indicate he was effective.

Except PFF stats always have subjectivity as one part of the equation. The whole point of moneyball was it was 100% objective.

Mikko is on fire

The better the pass, the more likely Moose would drop it. It seemed like a lot of his drops were on good throws, but he would catch bad throws.

Florida isn't gonna survive playing that game

Chase Claypool had such a good rookie year statistically, and now he's playing Canadian football.

To the original post, I'd feel pretty good if he did that. I'd want him to start again the following year, and I'd pick up his 5th year option. I would probably not feel like it's time to give him the bag yet though. I say probably because those stats don't have context. If he led 7 game winning drives for example, maybe it's time to pay him.

His nickname made it to his pro football reference page lol

It's from both sides. Some apparently can't even entertain a hypothetical where Bryce blows up and has amazing numbers. People are just dug into their opinion about him and waiting to be proven right.

I'm going Chatfield game 2.

Some of yall are way too sensitive about Bryce. Any QB is going to have doubters within the fanbase if they haven't won a Super Bowl. You don't think that Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson have doubters within their team's own fanbase? Bryce clearly isn't on their level (yet), so I don't understand the expectation that everyone get in line.