Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody argues DPAR of QB1 > DPAR of QB2 therefore QB1 is better,

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly this had been the crux of the Manning > Brady debate for quite some time for a lot of people

[/ QUOTE ]

well the gap was pretty huge

even with Brady's current 50pt lead this year(1extra game, so probably around 40effectively), the gap since 03 is 196.7DPAR or about 43/season, meaning you can forget Manning played in 04 and he's still lead over Brady

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody argues DPAR of QB1 > DPAR of QB2 therefore QB1 is better,

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly this had been the crux of the Manning > Brady debate for quite some time for a lot of people

[/ QUOTE ]

well the gap was pretty huge

even with Brady's current 50pt lead this year(1extra game, so probably around 40effectively), the gap since 03 is 196.7DPAR or about 43/season, meaning you can forget Manning played in 04 and he's still lead over Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

see [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] ?

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody argues DPAR of QB1 > DPAR of QB2 therefore QB1 is better,

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly this had been the crux of the Manning > Brady debate for quite some time for a lot of people

[/ QUOTE ]

well the gap was pretty huge

even with Brady's current 50pt lead this year(1extra game, so probably around 40effectively), the gap since 03 is 196.7DPAR or about 43/season, meaning you can forget Manning played in 04 and he's still lead over Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

see [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to be clear, I see the wink. But I'm gonna make a serious response anyway.

Meh. Basically it seems like the arguments go:

Brady: "I watch the games and he is super awesome."
Manning: "I watch the games and he is super awesome, plus the best stats we have show a pretty sizeable gap between the two, in Mannings favor."
Brady: "LOL you use stats too much, RINGZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!"

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody argues DPAR of QB1 > DPAR of QB2 therefore QB1 is better,

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly this had been the crux of the Manning > Brady debate for quite some time for a lot of people

[/ QUOTE ]

well the gap was pretty huge

even with Brady's current 50pt lead this year(1extra game, so probably around 40effectively), the gap since 03 is 196.7DPAR or about 43/season, meaning you can forget Manning played in 04 and he's still lead over Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

see [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to be clear, I see the wink. But I'm gonna make a serious response anyway.

Meh. Basically it seems like the arguments go:

Brady: "I watch the games and he is super awesome."
Manning: "I watch the games and he is super awesome, plus the best stats we have show a pretty sizeable gap between the two, in Mannings favor."
Brady: "LOL you use stats too much, RINGZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!"

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problem with stats, the problem is that the stats don't do a good job of measuring who is better. if you could magically put both these guys on teams with 100% identical talent, than 90% of what I would need would to decide who is better would be stats.

look, I don't know who is better. I do know that Manning has been ridiculously good for years now. I know that his #'s - both traditional and advanced - have been way better than Brady's. I know that Manning has also played with much better offensive talent around him, playing 1/2 his games on a field much better suited for offense. and I know that the one year (so far) that Brady has played with elite offensive talent around him, he has put up #'s better than either of them ever has.

I'm sure some of this is Brady running well, but if he had played with Moss/Welker/Stallworth his entire career, the Manning/Brady debate would be much different today. that's what I think.

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody argues DPAR of QB1 > DPAR of QB2 therefore QB1 is better,

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly this had been the crux of the Manning > Brady debate for quite some time for a lot of people

[/ QUOTE ]

well the gap was pretty huge

even with Brady's current 50pt lead this year(1extra game, so probably around 40effectively), the gap since 03 is 196.7DPAR or about 43/season, meaning you can forget Manning played in 04 and he's still lead over Brady

[/ QUOTE ]

see [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to be clear, I see the wink. But I'm gonna make a serious response anyway.

Meh. Basically it seems like the arguments go:

Brady: "I watch the games and he is super awesome."
Manning: "I watch the games and he is super awesome, plus the best stats we have show a pretty sizeable gap between the two, in Mannings favor."
Brady: "LOL you use stats too much, RINGZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!"

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problem with stats, the problem is that the stats don't do a good job of measuring who is better. if you could magically put both these guys on teams with 100% identical talent, than 90% of what I would need would to decide who is better would be stats.

look, I don't know who is better. I do know that Manning has been ridiculously good for years now. I know that his #'s - both traditional and advanced - have been way better than Brady's. I know that Manning has also played with much better offensive talent around him, playing 1/2 his games on a field much better suited for offense. and I know that the one year (so far) that Brady has played with elite offensive talent around him, he has put up #'s better than either of them ever has.

I'm sure some of this is Brady running well, but if he had played with Moss/Welker/Stallworth his entire career, the Manning/Brady debate would be much different today. that's what I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont disagree, I just think its misleading to say things like "stats dont say who is better" without pointing out that its more accurate to say "stats are way better at saying who is better than anything else, but they are still pretty bad." It doesnt give the impression that there actually IS some way to figure out who is better when it appears that there is no such thing.

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
CAUSATION DOES NOT EQUAL CORRELATION!!!

[/ QUOTE ]


Backwards.

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
CAUSATION DOES NOT EQUAL CORRELATION!!!

[/ QUOTE ]


Backwards.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol I can't believe it took 100 posts to catch that.

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
imo, not at all.

Those that saw Manning and felt he was better (kyro, some others) would use DPAR and other metrics to support their arguments while those that felt Brady was the better QB from watching the two could only point to the ZOMG rings yo! argument

[/ QUOTE ]

just recently I got into an argument with Vyse about this, who was only using DPAR. granted he is an idiot, but I'm sure I could find others who did the same thing. perhaps these people had other reasons for thinking so, but the majority of the argument would be based on DPAR or traditional stats.

now, I realize that arguments need to be based on some objective evidence, but that is the rub with QB debates - their greatness and effectiveness is greatly determined by surrounding talent, and we currently have no good way to isolate just their performance

[/ QUOTE ]

when the gap is ASTRONOMICAL, you don't need to say anything else. i said that to you in that thread and you shut up, so i assume you took your rape quietly. if not, i'll be glad to dish it out again.

no one is going to argue chris chambers is better than, well, anyone, and all you need is DVOA and DPAR because he's so bad and the gap is so wide that it's self-explanatory.

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
CAUSATION DOES NOT EQUAL CORRELATION!!!

[/ QUOTE ]


Backwards.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol I can't believe it took 100 posts to catch that.

[/ QUOTE ]i thought assani intentionally said it that way, given the caps and !!s

Re: Assani vs the StatHeads: Evaluating NFL QBs
 

I just figured well, its sort of true in that they arent exactly the same thing, although you cannot have causation WITHOUT correlation.