Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Cam for MVP, debunking statistical assumptions


Peppers90 NC

Recommended Posts

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

I didn't say it with certainty.  I said "I think", "I can't imagine".  Nothing in the entire discussion can be said with certainty. You can't say with certainty that Brady's backup wouldn't do better than him.  You can't say with certainty that Rodgers' backup wouldn't do better than him.  You can make educated guesses though.

Tom Brady goes down, insert Matt Cassel 10-6 season. Drew Bledsoe goes down, insert Tom Brady. It's not coincidence that Anderson has better statistics than Cam every preseason and last year against the Bucs twice, he played extremely well.

This isn't a Cam versus Anderson debate, this is me arguing that you are using one fallacy(we suck without Cam) to debunk another( Cam isn't MVP worthy). This team depends on the sum of its parts, from coaching down to the second string guys and to assume, or even argue that we would have lost 6 more games without Cam is a point you cannot back-up.

If anything, as I said before, you cannot even win the argument considering we are undefeated with Anderson starting since he's been here. 

It's a silly thing to say and ultimately shows weakness in the argument that Cam should be MVP. He should be MVP based on his play this season, not where we would be without him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

and be honest with yourself.  DA beat the TERRIBLE Bucs twice.  Cam almost certainly would have also beaten the Bucs both of those games.

You're missing the point. The point i'm trying to make is that there is no empirical, logical, or critically thought out explanation that could argue we wouldn't be a playoff team without Cam. 

That's my only point. I hate that people make arguments against fallacy's with fallacy's. It's weak and really undermines the credit you're trying to deservedly give. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

Tom Brady goes down, insert Matt Cassel 10-6 season. Drew Bledsoe goes down, insert Tom Brady. It's not coincidence that Anderson has better statistics than Cam every preseason and last year against the Bucs twice, he played extremely well.

This isn't a Cam versus Anderson debate, this is me arguing that you are using one fallacy(we suck without Cam) to debunk another( Cam isn't MVP worthy). This team depends on the sum of its parts, from coaching down to the second string guys and to assume, or even argue that we would have lost 6 more games without Cam is a point you cannot back-up.

If anything, as I said before, you cannot even win the argument considering we are undefeated with Anderson starting since he's been here. 

It's a silly thing to say and ultimately shows weakness in the argument that Cam should be MVP. He should be MVP based on his play this season, not where we would be without him. 

lol ok buddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

The assumption that we would not be a playoff team without Cam is a fallacy in itself. That is not something that can be proven and if anything can be debunked by the fact that with Derek Anderson starting we are 2-0. There isn't any evidence to say that we lose with Anderson starting. This is one of those things that we dislike when it was said about our starter, so why would it be different for the back-up?

Cam is playing at a high level this year, but to say we aren't a playoff team without him is a dig on everyone else. The team isn't built to be QB centric and it shows in the fact that regardless of if Cam is lights out (New Orleans) or managing (Dallas) we still win. 

I would appreciate never reading the statement again, especially considering how the rest of the South is playing. 

you can't possibly believe this.

in effect you are saying that it's fallacious to suggest cam newton is a better quarterback than derek anderson.

do you know what a fallacy is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JawnyBlaze said:

lol ok buddy

Have you been to college? Taken any critical thinking, debate, or even higher level english classes to try to understand what i'm arguing? It's shoddy journalism to make assumptions that cannot possibly be proven or disproven. The fact is it's a pointless argument that is used to boost someone else. In psychology this would be the downward comparison. It's unneeded when discussing Cam as an MVP candidate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

you can't possibly believe this.

in effect you are saying that it's fallacious to suggest cam newton is a better quarterback than derek anderson.

do you know what a fallacy is?

THE POINT IS THAT THE ARGUMENT IS NOT WORTH EVEN MENTIONING.

I'm not suggesting Anderson is better than Cam. I'm suggesting that to say we are not a playoff team without Cameron Jerrell Newton, is a point that does not boost Cam's MVP chances because it is something that can never be known. You can assume all you'd like, however using what we DO KNOW, we still win without Cam. Maybe not 13-0, maybe 13-0, no one knows. No one will ever know because its not possible to go back in time. 

So no, I don't believe that Anderson is better than Cam. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

Have you been to college? Taken any critical thinking, debate, or even higher level english classes to try to understand what i'm arguing? It's shoddy journalism to make assumptions that cannot possibly be proven or disproven. The fact is it's a pointless argument that is used to boost someone else. In psychology this would be the downward comparison. It's unneeded when discussing Cam as an MVP candidate. 

1. Yes, I've been to college.

2. I have a pretty highly intellectually demanding job, don't try to question someone's capabilities who you don't know.

3. I'm not a GD journalist.  I'm a fan with my own opinions, contributing to a medium that's main point is just that.

Just stop now.  I will not continue this discussion with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

THE POINT IS THAT THE ARGUMENT IS NOT WORTH EVEN MENTIONING.

I'm not suggesting Anderson is better than Cam. I'm suggesting that to say we are not a playoff team without Cameron Jerrell Newton, is a point that does not boost Cam's MVP chances because it is something that can never be known. You can assume all you'd like, however using what we DO KNOW, we still win without Cam. Maybe not 13-0, maybe 13-0, no one knows. No one will ever know because its not possible to go back in time. 

So no, I don't believe that Anderson is better than Cam. 

uh, yes it certainly does. one of the MVP metrics is being a guy whose performance elevates the play of the guys around him to the point where he's completely indispensable, he is such an integral part of what they do because of how the team is designed around his skillsets that if he was gone there is literally no one else (within reason) that could take his place and put up the same performance.

it's a reasonable statement to make that without cam this team wouldn't be undefeated, and that we'd have a few losses notched if DA were starting.

no one knows for sure, but we can project and we can extrapolate based on what we know of cam, DA, this offense, and the national football league. anything else and you're just being obtuse. your rationale doesn't pass the validity test, because it could be similarly applied to the packers, where you could argue that we don't really know that blaine gabbert wouldn't have the packers in the same playoff contention as aaron rodgers if he were the starter instead.

dumb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Lol. Any reason to throw digs at this guy. I didn't say he was built to do it. I said he was successful every time he's tried. That means he can do it. That's the opposite of fantasy. That's reality.  Steve Smith wasn't built to be a jump ball WR either. But he did it at a high clip. For the record, I'm not saying BY is the level of QB as Smitty was as a WR. Just an example of size not being the only component. 
    • Let's say we have a LT for 2026, because we do.  After that, let's say Ickey could be back and we would have the option of extending Walker.  That too is truth.  Don't get me wrong--I LOVE drafting OL, but drafting a first-round OT now is either wasting the money we just paid for a free agent OR it is like paying top dollar for a new car and keeping it in your garage for a season.  A first rounder should give us 4-5 years of cap relief by playing from day 1. I shall elaborate here: Teams obviously get desperate for OTs and if they enter the draft without 2 solid tackles, they are almost obligated to reach for a first round OT.  This year, I see 1 OT who is probably worth first-round consideration, and I am not putting him in the top 10 players in the draft.  Lomu, Freeling, Miller, and Proctor, for example, probably and arguably have second-round value.  So why would you reach for an OT in round 1 when you already have starters at both T positions but you have other needs? We do need depth, however, and I think there is decent OT depth that needs development on day 3. They are no slouches, by the way.   Drew Shelton (could drop to round 4): Surrendered 1 sack as Penn State's LT in 2025. 33 3/8" arms.  Pass pro improved every year (4 years--experienced).  "For a team running a zone-heavy scheme that values lateral movement and reach-blocking ability over phone-booth mauling, Shelton has real appeal. He is not a plug-and-play starter, but the athletic tools and the clear year-over-year improvement suggest a player who can develop into a capable starter if a coaching staff invests in his strength base and cleans up his technique. The ceiling depends entirely on how much stronger he can get and whether his feet can stay alive after initial contact."   Austin Barber  (could drop to round 4): I see him as a RT at best and a probable kick inside to Guard where his strengths would switch from secondary to primary tools.  Considering Lewis and Hunt may be gone in a year or two, this would give the Panthers a chance to work him at RT and then move him inside if he is not effective, and there is confidence that G may be his best position. Jude Bowery (4th round projection) was LT on a Boston College OL that was effective in the run game.  Bowery is one of the most athletic OTs in the draft.  His arms are not ideal but not too short (33.75") to play LT.  He surrendered 2 sacks. He is raw, and needs some technical refinement with his hands.  I think he has the best upside and value for this offense.   Dametrious Crownover  TexAM (5th round projection; 35 3/8" arms) is one of the more fascinating developmental tackles in this class because the physical tools are legitimately rare. A strong run blocker who should be better in pass protection with his tools.  "You do not find many 6-7, 336-pound men with that foot speed and who have the athletic background of a converted tight end. When everything clicks, he looks like a starting right tackle in a gap-heavy run scheme, smothering defenders at the point of attack and using his length to erase speed off the edge. The 2024 tape, when he anchored one of the best rushing attacks in the SEC, is the version of Crownover that gets offensive line coaches excited."  THIS is the kind of player our coaches could develop until Moton is done. Isaiah World  (Oregon, injured ACL in playoffs, 5th round projection--could slide to 6th).  World will not play much if at all in 2026, which is why he might fall.  For the Panthers' purposes, however, this would give the OL coaches time to work with him. "What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly." "That said, the investment argument isn't crazy for the right organization. This is still a tackle with first-round portal grades and the kind of athletic profile that doesn't just disappear. A team with patience and a strong offensive line room can afford to stash World on the roster, let him develop his lower-body power and pad-level consistency during the recovery process, and potentially unlock a starting-caliber right tackle somewhere in his second or third season. The path is longer now, but the destination hasn't changed for a scout willing to bet on the physical tools." You get the idea. If we do not need the OT immediately, draft one later and develop him as depth and for next season.  Most college players drafted in round 1 were not first rounders if they had entered the draft the year before,  so why not grab a player with upside?      
    • Its never the QBs fault, so if we get a new WR and he looks bad he must be a bust
×
×
  • Create New...