Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chloe6124

Chris Ballard on the fan

Recommended Posts

I would think that after last year's FA signings and the additions this year, that we can trust Chris Ballard to do the right thing.  When we aren't over paying for Free Agents on the first or second day next year, we'll not freak out and let the man do his job.  We have a lot of free agents on our roster next year that he will need to address and we'll have the cap space to keep our core together.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Since the day we signed him one you have doubted the talent level of Funchess.

Now you want to use one game to judge the whole team and what it did the last the last 12 games of the season?  That is being too narrow minded IMO.

LOL. I can show you stats from the entire year that clearly shows our WR position group lacked a true WR2 and was a sub par group overall aside from TY. Snap counts, yards, separation/cushion average, and much more are pretty clear. That's not narrow. In terms of Funchess, I've followed him since his UM days. That's not narrow either. 

 

It's not "doubting" Funchess. It's objectively looking at data.

What is more logical?

1) forming an opinion based on past performance and stats

2) ignoring past performance/stats and assuming improvement based on a feeling.

 

Funchess should improve his stats next year. What he likely will not do is hit 800 yards without taking a lot of targets and yards from Ebron, or provide a vertical threat to keep double coverage off TY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

LOL. I can show you stats from the entire year that clearly shows our WR position group lacked a true WR2 and was a sub par group overall aside from TY. Snap counts, yards, separation/cushion average, and much more are pretty clear. That's not narrow. In terms of Funchess, I've followed him since his UM days. That's not narrow either. 

 

It's not "doubting" Funchess. It's objectively looking at data.

What is more logical?

1) forming an opinion based on past performance and stats

2) ignoring past performance/stats and assuming improvement based on a feeling.

 

Funchess should improve his stats next year. What he likely will not do is hit 800 yards without taking a lot of targets and yards from Ebron, or provide a vertical threat to keep double coverage off TY.

 

I agree on Funchess. Hope I am wrong. But I watched him for a long time. Here is a good representation of what the Colts are getting. Pretty slow, no separation but does make some nice contested catches, no YAC...and a deep pass that he plays small and doesn't go up and get it. He will have some production...I just don't see Luck slinging it to a guy who is draped by a DB.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2019 at 7:00 PM, Chloe6124 said:

A safety is never going to be the difference in winning a SB. 

Bob Sanders.... Case and point....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree on Funchess. Hope I am wrong. But I watched him for a long time. Here is a good representation of what the Colts are getting. Pretty slow, no separation but does make some nice contested catches, no YAC...and a deep pass that he plays small and doesn't go up and get it. He will have some production...I just don't see Luck slinging it to a guy who is draped by a DB.

 

 

 

I do think he will make some circus catches and people will go wow. But his general production and consistency will be meh. Hope I'm wrong. IMO, he should have bulked up a little, and stayed at the TE in college. He'd be much more valuable and the norm in that position. UM convincing him to go WR I think hurt his career. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Barry Sears said:

 

Or Bob Kraft!

I tried my best to resist THAT hanging fruit.

(no pun intended)

Tho if i were a NE fan, I WOULD NOT be ordering one of those Super Bowl champion TOWELS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CB just seems like a regular dude.  Someone you could have a beer with......only smarter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Chucklez said:

Bob Sanders.... Case and point....

 

So we are comparing a player that had the ability, skill, and talent to be a HOF player with a no name undrafted or unsigned player? Really? You realize how rare a talent like Sanders was right? And you realize there hasn't been many a safety as good as him since then right? 

 

Just checking. Because your comment suggests you think Sanders was a dime a dozen safety. Safeties like Sanders are rare. Not the norm. 

 

Case in point what? That a HOF talented S can out you over the top to get to the SB? Absolutely.  But I dont think you mean HOF talent now do you. Of course not. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

So we are comparing a player that had the ability, skill, and talent to be a HOF player with a no name undrafted or unsigned player? Really? You realize how rare a talent like Sanders was right? And you realize there hasn't been many a safety as good as him since then right? 

 

Just checking. Because your comment suggests you think Sanders was a dime a dozen safety. Safeties like Sanders are rare. Not the norm. 

 

Case in point what? That a HOF talented S can out you over the top to get to the SB? Absolutely.  But I dont think you mean HOF talent now do you. Of course not. 

what are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

LOL. I can show you stats from the entire year that clearly shows our WR position group lacked a true WR2 and was a sub par group overall aside from TY. Snap counts, yards, separation/cushion average, and much more are pretty clear. That's not narrow. In terms of Funchess, I've followed him since his UM days. That's not narrow either. 

 

It's not "doubting" Funchess. It's objectively looking at data.

What is more logical?

1) forming an opinion based on past performance and stats

2) ignoring past performance/stats and assuming improvement based on a feeling.

 

Funchess should improve his stats next year. What he likely will not do is hit 800 yards without taking a lot of targets and yards from Ebron, or provide a vertical threat to keep double coverage off TY.

You keep coming back to validating your speculation that F is likely a bad signing because F + E in 2019 will not have many more catches than E did in 2018.

 

E had those catches because he was the only target other than TY, which is not a sustainable approach in general, and definitely not so if E gets hurt or not 100%.  If Funchess takes underneath catches, Ebron can still provide the deepish threat for TY, at the same time keeping the DBs closer to the LOS because there is now an underneath threat in addition to TY and Ebron being on the field, not to mention Doyle or his replacement.  The DBs are more spread out, thereby helping all receivers.

 

If Funchess turns out to be better than Grant, it was a good signing, especially since Inman appears to not be on board yet and may walk over money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DougDew said:

You keep coming back to validating your speculation that F is likely a bad signing because F + E in 2019 will not have many more catches than E did in 2018.

 

E had those catches because he was the only target other than TY, which is not a sustainable approach in general, and definitely not so if E gets hurt or not 100%.  If Funchess takes underneath catches, Ebron can still provide the deepish threat for TY, at the same time keeping the DBs closer to the LOS because there is now an underneath threat in addition to TY and Ebron being on the field, not to mention Doyle or his replacement.  The DBs are more spread out, thereby helping all receivers.

 

If Funchess turns out to be better than Grant, it was a good signing, especially since Inman appears to not be on board yet and may walk over money. 

No, that's not what I said. I illustrated clearly that Ebron's targets were consistent with TEs in Reich's previous Os. In fact, Ertz had the exact number of targets in 2017, that Ebron had in 2018. And only a few less in 2016. So, if Reich has done the same thing,  target and production wise with two different TEs, on two teams, in three straight years, why is it not sustainable? That is the very definition of consistency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

No, that's not what I said. I illustrated clearly that Ebron's targets were consistent with TEs in Reich's previous Os. In fact, Ertz had the exact number of targets in 2017, that Ebron had in 2018. And only a few less in 2016. So, if Reich has done the same thing,  target and production wise with two different TEs, on two teams, in three straight years, why is it not sustainable? That is the very definition of consistency. 

Ertz in 17 had the same number of targets as Ebron in 18?!?    Really?

 

Link?   Source?    I’d like to see that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ertz in 17 had the same number of targets as Ebron in 18?!?    Really?

 

Link?   Source?    I’d like to see that. 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/ErtzZa00.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/EbroEr00.htm

Ertz 2017 110

Ebron 2018 110

 

edit: BTW worth pointing out that Ebron got those receptions on much lower snapcount. Ebron got them on 634 snaps, while Ertz got them on 776 snaps. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ertz in 17 had the same number of targets as Ebron in 18?!?    Really?

 

Link?   Source?    I’d like to see that. 

yes, really.

reich has tried to stay as consistent as possible to his scheme (which worries me a bit)

 

here ya go. by the way, very easy to find.

under rushing/receiving > receiving > sort on targets

 

Ebron 110 in 18

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/2018.htm

 

Ertz 110 in 17

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/phi/2017.htm


Ertz 106 in 16

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/phi/2016.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Irish YJ said:

yes, really.

reich has tried to stay as consistent as possible to his scheme (which worries me a bit)

 

here ya go. by the way, very easy to find.

under rushing/receiving > receiving > sort on targets

 

Ebron 110 in 18

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/2018.htm

 

Ertz 110 in 17

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/phi/2017.htm


Ertz 106 in 16

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/phi/2016.htm

Yes...    you’re correct.   Stitches cane along and gave links to support your view.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the Eagles stats 15-17, they had huge WR turnover. Ertz was the only constant in those years. 

 

Stitches - his snap count in 16 was even higher...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

No, that's not what I said. I illustrated clearly that Ebron's targets were consistent with TEs in Reich's previous Os. In fact, Ertz had the exact number of targets in 2017, that Ebron had in 2018. And only a few less in 2016. So, if Reich has done the same thing,  target and production wise with two different TEs, on two teams, in three straight years, why is it not sustainable? That is the very definition of consistency. 

Because the #2 WR for the Eagles was the same quality as the #2WR for the Colts.  Which probably accounts for the WR turnover at Philly.

 

And Ballard wants is hoping that Funchess will be better than both.  If so, then the offense should be in position to score more points.  Who gets the catches and the yards doesn't matter.  If Funchess is better than Grant, the signing is a success.  What individual statistics the TE produces at the end of the season doesn't matter, and they also have no bearing on whether or not the turnover at WR#2 was positive.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Because the #2 WR for the Eagles was the same quality as the #2WR for the Colts.  And Ballard, not Reich, is hoping that Funchess will be better than both.  That's pretty clear, he wants an upgrade over Grant, and it won't be taking targets away from TY.

First thing, Grant actually played worse with the Colts than he did the year prior in GB.

Second, Dorial B Green (Eagles #2 in 2016) was a head case (multiple arrests/legal issues), but was much more talented than Grant. Nelson Agholor took over #2 in 2016 for DBG and was a full time #2 in 2017. Agholor is more talented than Grant. Also keep in mind that in those years, Sproles was used heavily (in the passing game) in 2016, as well as the #2 TE (Burton). And in 2017, they added Alshon Jeffery and Torrey Smith. Jeffery without a doubt was better. Smith was old, but still better than Grant. 

 

I'm giving you my opinion (and my prediction, supported by data), and you're talking like your opinion is fact. Neither one of us know how Funchess will be used. Neither one of us know how his use might change as the year goes along. Neither know who it might impact Ebron. We also have zero clue if Ballard and Reich plan to go WR in the draft, and if so where. And let's not forget, They drafted Cain last year to be the long term #2.

 

To quote Ballard.... from the indystar...

Quote

“Do I think he has (No. 2) ability?” Ballard said. “Absolutely, I do.”

 

On Ballard hoping that Funchess is better than both. "Hope" is not a strategy. I'm sure Ballard has an actual strategy, and pretty sure that strategy was at minimum socialized heavily with Reich, if not led by Reich. GMs typically don't dictate offensive strategy. It's normally the coach that provides the need to the GM, and the GM and the coach work to identify the player.

 

The GM is ultimately responsible for the hiring and contractual elements, and overall team management. Some GMs are more heavy handed than other, some are less. With Ballard being only a GM for 2 years, doubt he's one of the heavy handed ones. I'm sure he works in concert with Reich, not as the absolute ruler. And then also have QBs that may or may not have a lot of input to the process. Irsay made sure Manning had a significant voice in O matters. I doubt Luck has the same type of cred as Peyton, but I'd bet he holds some weight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

First thing, Grant actually played worse with the Colts than he did the year prior in GB.

Second, Dorial B Green (Eagles #2 in 2016) was a head case (multiple arrests/legal issues), but was much more talented than Grant. Nelson Agholor took over #2 in 2016 for DBG and was a full time #2 in 2017. Agholor is more talented than Grant. Also keep in mind that in those years, Sproles was used heavily (in the passing game) in 2016, as well as the #2 TE (Burton). And in 2017, they added Alshon Jeffery and Torrey Smith. Jeffery without a doubt was better. Smith was old, but still better than Grant. 

 

I'm giving you my opinion (and my prediction, supported by data), and you're talking like your opinion is fact. Neither one of us know how Funchess will be used. Neither one of us know how his use might change as the year goes along. Neither know who it might impact Ebron. We also have zero clue if Ballard and Reich plan to go WR in the draft, and if so where. And let's not forget, They drafted Cain last year to be the long term #2.

 

To quote Ballard.... from the indystar...

 

On Ballard hoping that Funchess is better than both. "Hope" is not a strategy. I'm sure Ballard has an actual strategy, and pretty sure that strategy was at minimum socialized heavily with Reich, if not led by Reich. GMs typically don't dictate offensive strategy. It's normally the coach that provides the need to the GM, and the GM and the coach work to identify the player.

 

The GM is ultimately responsible for the hiring and contractual elements, and overall team management. Some GMs are more heavy handed than other, some are less. With Ballard being only a GM for 2 years, doubt he's one of the heavy handed ones. I'm sure he works in concert with Reich, not as the absolute ruler. And then also have QBs that may or may not have a lot of input to the process. Irsay made sure Manning had a significant voice in O matters. I doubt Luck has the same type of cred as Peyton, but I'd bet he holds some weight. 

But you're using Eagles offensive statistics to forecast the Colts, and nowhere have you accounted for the absence of a player like TY on the Eagles, and the likelihood that all other receivers got more targets because of it.  I'm not using what happened on the Eagles to forecast what I think will happen with the Colts.   The data is from two different universe pools, IMO.

 

I'm simply using common sense that says any one receiver is likely to have fewer targets the more quality receivers are added to the corps, not withstanding the fact that you always want to get a certain amount of targets to your best players.  I would assume that if Ebron got the same amount of targets as he did last year, it would be because Funchess has not provided Luck with a confident option, but I certainly don't think that is a fact at this point.

 

Interesting question:  As Inman emerged later in the season, did WR#2 get more targets as the season wore on, and did any other receiver get fewer targets?  I suspect Inman's production was probably too little too late to move the needle, but it would be an interesting analysis.

 

No offense intended, just an observation about our world: As for data analytics in general, I've noticed over the years as we've progressed more into the digital age, there is growing inverse relationship between the use of statistics and the use of common sense to form opinions.  When one goes up, the other tends to go down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 12:34 AM, Irish YJ said:

 

sorry, still don't think they have to worry too much about our O. we haven't done anything to get TY out of double coverage. between that, and Reich's short/quick horizontal attack, DC's aren't going to quake. at least not the top ones. we still can't compete in a boat race.

 

they are definitely taking notice of our D though. houston alone is big time, but the biggest impact IMO is that he will demand enough attention, that other lanes will be open, and our other guys (and our new 1st round iDL :-) will all look much improved.

Im not sure man, Reich and Co. took a little time to get some things sorted out offensively. With a full season, now offseason, I would think the playbook will expand, especially considering we are returning nearly all of our starters. They are getting close to being able to utilize every "level" of a defense and exploit accordingly. We saw what the offense is capable of, good and bad, I would think we will see more of the good. Injuries/depth is the key at this point. No way you can gameplan just for TY. Too many options with more to come. I really like Reich and Luck putting their brains together and the chances of really good results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard's got the gift when it comes to his speeches and interviews.  I think we really have to consider making a push for Key & Peele to do a skit for Chris Ballard - The College Years:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DougDew said:

But you're using Eagles offensive statistics to forecast the Colts, and nowhere have you accounted for the absence of a player like TY on the Eagles, and the likelihood that all other receivers got more targets because of it.  I'm not using what happened on the Eagles to forecast what I think will happen with the Colts.   The data is from two different universe pools, IMO.

 

I'm simply using common sense that says any one receiver is likely to have fewer targets the more quality receivers are added to the corps, not withstanding the fact that you always want to get a certain amount of targets to your best players.  I would assume that if Ebron got the same amount of targets as he did last year, it would be because Funchess has not provided Luck with a confident option, but I certainly don't think that is a fact at this point.

 

Interesting question:  As Inman emerged later in the season, did WR#2 get more targets as the season wore on, and did any other receiver get fewer targets?  I suspect Inman's production was probably too little too late to move the needle, but it would be an interesting analysis.

 

No offense intended, just an observation about our world: As for data analytics in general, I've noticed over the years as we've progressed more into the digital age, there is growing inverse relationship between the use of statistics and the use of common sense to form opinions.  When one goes up, the other tends to go down.

 

you were the one that compared Eagles WRs (during Reich's tenure) to Colts WRs in response to my last post. so why wouldn't i use Eagles stats to reply?

 

in terms of targets, it depends on the O scheme as much as the personnel. Ertz got the same amount of targets in 16 and 17 when the WR turnover was huge between those years (top 2 WRs were traded out between 16 and 17). 

 

to answer your Q. WR2 didn't really increase. didn't do all the math, but WR2 (RG) early season average looked very similar to WR2 (RG+DI) late season.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GranRy01/gamelog/2018/

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/I/InmaDo00/gamelog/2018/

 

in terms of other WRs, not a lot of clear trending one way or the other. it's up and down, and a lot can be explained by injury.

 

the biggest lack of common sense is to form strong opinions without understanding the fact/data/stats first. sometimes numbers can be interpreted in different ways and require the common sense factor, sometimes numbers are simply undeniable. regardless, it's always silly, or lazy, to not at minimum understand the numbers. i form opinions all the time prior to understanding the data behind the scene. And most time, understanding the data later impacts my opinion. It may either strengthen, or change it. why anyone would not want all the information available when debating is a big ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mr.NotSoCreative said:

Im not sure man, Reich and Co. took a little time to get some things sorted out offensively. With a full season, now offseason, I would think the playbook will expand, especially considering we are returning nearly all of our starters. They are getting close to being able to utilize every "level" of a defense and exploit accordingly. We saw what the offense is capable of, good and bad, I would think we will see more of the good. Injuries/depth is the key at this point. No way you can gameplan just for TY. Too many options with more to come. I really like Reich and Luck putting their brains together and the chances of really good results.

the only thing the worries me, is that Reich's system is a quick pass horizontal scheme. luck can do the horizontal stuff, but he's a vertical guy. hope they can work out a good mesh, and i also hope they get Luck another vertical WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Irish YJ said:

the only thing the worries me, is that Reich's system is a quick pass horizontal scheme. luck can do the horizontal stuff, but he's a vertical guy. hope they can work out a good mesh, and i also hope they get Luck another vertical WR.

No doubt man, and I got the whole levels thing from an interview from Reich lol. I think we were so worried about having Luck handle the ball like a hot potato because of his return to the field. Dude held up just fine and maybe Reich has multiple wrinkles to use with another speed/verticle threat. I suppose thats why im looking at a guy like Campbell in the draft with speed out of the slot as well as outside. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2019 at 5:03 PM, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I can't see either the Jets or the Redskins getting over the playoff hump as a result of those 2 signings. Barring some crazy unforeseen circumstances, the Pats will easily win the East, & the Cowboys & Eagles will both keep the Redskins out of it, IMO.

You are correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mr.NotSoCreative said:

No doubt man, and I got the whole levels thing from an interview from Reich lol. I think we were so worried about having Luck handle the ball like a hot potato because of his return to the field. Dude held up just fine and maybe Reich has multiple wrinkles to use with another speed/verticle threat. I suppose thats why im looking at a guy like Campbell in the draft with speed out of the slot as well as outside. 

give me all the speed. Isabella is really starting to grow on me. I'd prefer tall and fast, but i'll be happy with anyone fast that can blow the top off the D and catch the ball. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

what are you talking about?

Pretty clearly wrote out what I mean. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Chucklez said:

Bob Sanders.... Case and point....

And Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu and Rodney Harrison and Ronnie Lott and Darren Woodson....I think everyone gets the point by now. Perennial winning seasons and elite defenses. It was suicide going over the middle against those secondaries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

Pretty clearly wrote out what I mean. 

your rant was pointless all the poster said was a safety has made a difference in winning a superbowl and provided an example. there are numerous other examples that show safeties are important to super bowl winning teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

your rant was pointless all the poster said was a safety has made a difference in winning a superbowl and provided an example. there are numerous other examples that show safeties are important to super bowl winning teams.

 

It wasn't much of a rant. Just a disagreement. My point was pretty clear. Yes. A safety can make a difference. My disagreement was with the example of Bob Sanders who was a one of a kind player. 

 

Besides that every position is important to win a SB. So overall pretty redundant.

 

Do you honestly care? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2019 at 2:48 AM, NannyMcafee said:

 

So we are comparing a player that had the ability, skill, and talent to be a HOF player with a no name undrafted or unsigned player? Really? You realize how rare a talent like Sanders was right? And you realize there hasn't been many a safety as good as him since then right? 

 

Just checking. Because your comment suggests you think Sanders was a dime a dozen safety. Safeties like Sanders are rare. Not the norm. 

 

Case in point what? That a HOF talented S can out you over the top to get to the SB? Absolutely.  But I dont think you mean HOF talent now do you. Of course not. 

Lol what are you on? 

 

I didnt say any of that did I? I merely pointed out that you can have game breaking players at the position who CAN tangibly help you win you a Super Bowl.

 

Troy polumalu and Ed Reed would agree too.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

To quote Ballard.... from the indystar..

"Do I think he has #2 ability?   Absolutely, I do".

 

On Ballard hoping that Funchess is better than both. "Hope" is not a strategy. I'm sure Ballard has an actual strategy, and pretty sure that strategy was at minimum socialized heavily with Reich, if not led by Reich. GMs typically don't dictate offensive strategy. It's normally the coach that provides the need to the GM, and the GM and the coach work to identify the player.

 

There is a difference between absolutely and hope.

"Do I think he has #2 ability?  Absolutely, I do".

"Do I think he has #2 ability?  I hope so".

Don't you think Ballard has shown he knows players?

He said him and the talking heads have watched tape 10-14 hours a day for weeks. That is a lot of eyeballs looking. They are also looking at tapes most of us have never seen. They have sent scouts out to check these players entire history on and off the field.

With that in mind don't you think the GM and coaches see things the fans don't?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chucklez said:

Lol what are you on? 

 

I didnt say any of that did I? I merely pointed out that you can have game breaking players at the position who CAN tangibly help you win you a Super Bowl.

 

Troy polumalu and Ed Reed would agree too.

 

Just because you didnt understand something doesn't mean they're on drugs. Stop being so offensive. My apologies for misunderstanding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

you were the one that compared Eagles WRs (during Reich's tenure) to Colts WRs in response to my last post. so why wouldn't i use Eagles stats to reply?

 

in terms of targets, it depends on the O scheme as much as the personnel. Ertz got the same amount of targets in 16 and 17 when the WR turnover was huge between those years (top 2 WRs were traded out between 16 and 17). 

 

to answer your Q. WR2 didn't really increase. didn't do all the math, but WR2 (RG) early season average looked very similar to WR2 (RG+DI) late season.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GranRy01/gamelog/2018/

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/I/InmaDo00/gamelog/2018/

 

in terms of other WRs, not a lot of clear trending one way or the other. it's up and down, and a lot can be explained by injury.

 

the biggest lack of common sense is to form strong opinions without understanding the fact/data/stats first. sometimes numbers can be interpreted in different ways and require the common sense factor, sometimes numbers are simply undeniable. regardless, it's always silly, or lazy, to not at minimum understand the numbers. i form opinions all the time prior to understanding the data behind the scene. And most time, understanding the data later impacts my opinion. It may either strengthen, or change it. why anyone would not want all the information available when debating is a big ???

You brought up the notion of how the Colts offense will perform, by saying "Ebron's targets were consistent with Reich's previous O's".  No way would I have ever talked about the Eagles WRs without that context, because using that flawed universe of data as an underpinning of an opinion lacks common sense.  One had TY Hilton.  The other had WR turnover from 15-17, as has been pointed out. 

 

And with that stat, nobody really needs to know the exact amount of turnover, because we all know why and how that data point was created, in part, no TY.  Processing the datapoint into an opinion is simply being proud of the fact that we have the ability to process irrelevant minutia.  Hello digital age.

 

I understand your use of the word lazy, it becomes a separation word between those who do and those who don't use stats.  I get it.  Did you know that tech companies purposely use the word "smart" in nearly all of their advertising. smart phone, smart TV, smart camera?  It makes the user feel smart if they use their products, and a smarter person in general if they use "smart" techniques.  Welcome to marketing the gullable in the digital age.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 10:48 PM, NannyMcafee said:

 

So we are comparing a player that had the ability, skill, and talent to be a HOF player with a no name undrafted or unsigned player? Really? You realize how rare a talent like Sanders was right? And you realize there hasn't been many a safety as good as him since then right? 

the comment you are responding too was talking about landon collins, a first round pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...