Steve Smith: Bridgewater is QB for "right now"

[LinvilleGorge]

Keep talking in more circles with nothing to support it. It's comical at this point.

Brees and Bridgewater played in the same offense with the same supporting cast and the numbers couldn't be more drastically different. But... let's just ignore that because it doesn't fit the preconceived narrative. LOL!

[Vagrant]

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Keep talking in more circles with nothing to support it. It's comical at this point.

 

given ten minutes, i could explain these concepts you're refusing to entertain to a child. your blindness to counterpoints limits your opinions to uselessness because they're clearly established without an ounce of introspective thought. you're just baby bird vomiting them back up where it's convenient for your argument and ignoring any valid refutations. 

[Madwolf]

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Keep talking in more circles with nothing to support it. It's comical at this point.

Brees and Bridgewater played in the same offense with the same supporting cast and the numbers couldn't be more drastically different. But... let's just ignore that because it doesn't fit the preconceived narrative. LOL!

I will defend Teddy here a bit, cause you know I will, and say that he's had far less time in the Saints offense than Brees, so it's not surprising that Brees is quicker to make the reads and throws. And on the bright side, Bridgewater is still making the right throws.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Madwolf said:

I will defend Teddy here a bit, cause you know I will, and say that he's had far less time in the Saints offense than Brees, so it's not surprising that Brees is quicker to make the reads and throws. And on the bright side, Bridgewater is still making the right throws.

Yep, definitely understand that, but #2 to #23 is a huge slide in the same offense with the same supporting cast. Brees also had a huge advantage in completion percentage and TD%. The very similar yards per completion and INT% indicates that they were likely both making similar reads, Teddy was just doing so a lot less efficiently.

[Madwolf]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep, definitely understand that, but #2 to #23 is a huge slide in the same offense with the same supporting cast. Brees also had a huge advantage in completion percentage and TD%. The very similar yards per completion and INT% indicates that they were likely both making similar reads, Teddy was just doing so a lot less efficiently.

Your point is well taken sir, you just know I like my guy.

[Vagrant]

16 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Keep talking in more circles with nothing to support it. It's comical at this point.

Brees and Bridgewater played in the same offense with the same supporting cast and the numbers couldn't be more drastically different. But... let's just ignore that because it doesn't fit the preconceived narrative. LOL!

suppositions that could blow your "stats" apart:

1. film review that exhibits bridgewater showing incredible patience in the pocket due to recognition that his line was holding up well to give his WR more time to get open. 

2. film review showing brees killing plays shortly after the snap because he didn't like the look of the development

3. limited number of pass attempts comparatively that skew the average based on an inadequate sample size. 

this could go on and on and on and on and you'd refuse to believe any of these factors could impact the stat from being exactly as you interpret it to be. there is 0% of me that is arguing with the stat. the stat is real. but what isn't real is you making half-baked conclusions from that data that you believe to be unimpeachable because you used a stat. that's not how it works. you have to show your work, but you're either too daft or too stubborn to do it. 

[LinvilleGorge]

5 minutes ago, Vagrant said:

given ten minutes, i could explain these concepts you're refusing to entertain to a child. your blindness to counterpoints limits your opinions to uselessness because they're clearly established without an ounce of introspective thought. you're just baby bird vomiting them back up where it's convenient for your argument and ignoring any valid refutations. 

One of us seeks to base our opinions on actual data. The other developed an opinion and then steadfastly refuses to acknowledge any data to the contrary while building a strawman of whataboutisms in an attempt to distract the conversation from actual data. There's a reason why Tepper is so analytical. More often than not it works.

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, Vagrant said:

suppositions that could blow your "stats" apart:

1. film review that exhibits bridgewater showing incredible patience in the pocket due to recognition that his line was holding up well to give his WR more time to get open. 

2. film review showing brees killing plays shortly after the snap because he didn't like the look of the development

3. limited number of pass attempts comparatively that skew the average based on an inadequate sample size. 

this could go on and on and on and on and you'd refuse to believe any of these factors could impact the stat from being exactly as you interpret it to be. there is 0% of me that is arguing with the stat. the stat is real. but what isn't real is you making half-baked conclusions from that data that you believe to be unimpeachable because you used a stat. that's not how it works. you have to show your work, but you're either too daft or too stubborn to do it. 

Those things "could", but do they? 

As for #1, they played in the same offense with nearly identical yards per completion. That's highly unlikely. As for #2, that's part of playing QB. As for #3, feel free to cherry pick any five game stretch from Brees last season to demonstrate otherwise.

The reality is that they played in the same offense with the same supporting cast and their was a drastic difference in the numbers. Some difference is absolutely to be expected, but 7 percentage point different in completion percentage? #2 to #23 in average time to throw? Brees having a 50% higher TD percentage? Sorry man, the data just paints a very different story than the one you're trying to paint using ideas with nothing to support them.

[Vagrant]

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

One of us seeks to base our opinions on actual data. The other developed an opinion and then steadfastly refuses to acknowledge any data to the contrary while building a strawman of whataboutisms in an attempt to distract the conversation from actual data. There's a reason why Tepper is so analytical. More often than not it works.

one of us is cherry picking a single stat to manifest a problem out of thin air while refusing to believe that the stat is inherently only part of the picture. despite about 5 incredibly valid examples citing where your stat fails to account for variables consistent to what a quarterback sees in a game, you insist that the stat means whatever you say it means. i am incredibly willing to discuss the relevance of the stat. you are not. which one of us is being closed minded? 

[LinvilleGorge]

6 minutes ago, Madwolf said:

Your point is well taken sir, you just know I like my guy.

Hey man, I get it. If he came from my college team I probably would too.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Vagrant said:

one of us is cherry picking a single stat to manifest a problem out of thin air while refusing to believe that the stat is inherently only part of the picture. despite about 5 incredibly valid examples citing where your stat fails to account for variables consistent to what a quarterback sees in a game, you insist that the stat means whatever you say it means. i am incredibly willing to discuss the relevance of the stat. you are not. which one of us is being closed minded? 

Go back and read. It's not a single stat. You assume every circumstantial piece of evidence would fall your way. I highly doubt that it would and I point to actual data to suggest otherwise.

[Vagrant]

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Those things "could", but do they? 

As for #1, they played in the same offense with nearly identical yards per completion. That's highly unlikely. As for #2, that's part of playing QB. As for #3, feel free to cherry pick any five game stretch from Brees last season to demonstrate otherwise.

The reality is that they played in the same offense with the same supporting cast and their was a drastic difference in the numbers. Some difference is absolutely to be expected, but 7 percentage point different in completion percentage? #2 to #23 in average time to throw? Brees having a 50% higher TD percentage? Sorry man, the data just paints a very different story than the one you're trying to paint using ideas with nothing to support them.

it is incredibly, incredibly pretentious of you to pretend to have a grasp of analytics so advanced that it rivals that of NFL executives and to lump yourself together with them as if they'd interpret the stat the same way as you would. where you're failing is the disconnect between a stat just sitting there being a number. there's no context, there's no ascribed meaning. it's just neutral. it doesn't care what point you want to make. it doesn't care what point you're trying to disprove. it literally is like saying there are 6 eggs in this crate. stats are irrefutable. what you say the stat means? entirely refutable. i can lead you to this conclusion ten times and it doesn't seem like it's going to stick, but this would be a good lesson for you in interpretation if you could grasp it. 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, Vagrant said:

it is incredibly, incredibly pretentious of you to pretend to have a grasp of analytics so advanced that it rivals that of NFL executives and to lump yourself together with them as if they'd interpret the stat the same way as you would. where you're failing is the disconnect between a stat just sitting there being a number. there's no context, there's no ascribed meaning. it's just neutral. it doesn't care what point you want to make. it doesn't care what point you're trying to disprove. it literally is like saying there are 6 eggs in this crate. stats are irrefutable. what you say the stat means? entirely refutable. i can lead you to this conclusion ten times and it doesn't seem like it's going to stick, but this would be a good lesson for you in interpretation if you could grasp it. 

Did I say any of this? LOL! You mad as hell.

Sorry man, your argument has so far basically boiled down to "I don't like the fact that data suggests my assumption that seemed solid (honestly, it did) was likely incorrect" so no I'm mad as hell about it and I'm throwing mud at the wall that cannot be substantiated or refuted in an attempt to distract from any and all data.

[Vagrant]

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Did I say any of this? LOL! You mad as hell.

Sorry man, your argument has so far basically boiled down to "I don't like the fact that data suggests my assumption that seemed solid (honestly, it did) was likely incorrect" so no I'm mad as hell about it and I'm throwing mud at the wall that cannot be substantiated or refuted in an attempt to distract from any and all data.

dude, I am zero percent mad. I am a teacher, so teaching is what I do. when i see an example of someone utilizing logic that is flawed or doesn't capture the full scope of the point they're trying to make, it's helpful to inform them of that so they don't make that mistake again in the future and convince themselves into believing every supposition they have can be supported by a stat when the stat itself has no opinion. it's a number that is totally neutral. my efforts have been to illuminate that point for you and you've refused to entertain the idea that your stat isn't comprehensive to what you're attempting to show it represents. the data doesn't suggest anything. the people that track the data would even tell you that. what the data CAN do is provide corroboration to what you're seeing and attempt to quantify it numerically. but nobody at all who deals with statistics will look at you straight in the face and say "average time from snap to throw is the definitive measure for how a quarterback senses pressure," because they understand that one stat alone can't offer that much insight. the multitude of exceptions provided above should have walked you to that by now, but you're digging your heels in for some reason and that is the antithesis of using all the resources you have available, including the opinions of others, to help shape your interpretation of the world. if you're relying upon yourself alone to interpret everything, you'll never learn another thing in your life.