2021 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

[Simpleton]

Schultzy's my guy.

Jarwin might be better at YAC, but Schultz seems about as sure-handed as they come.

The next great Dallas TE.

I mean there's no chance he's another Witten or even Novacek, but a solid starting TE who you can win with?

Sure.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I'm tempted to say YPC for a RB.

But it's probably batting average in baseball.

 

[ravidubey]

Schultz is very limited though. He’s a jag really. Nothing wrong with that. He had production in 2020 as a 4th or 5th receiving option.

Jarwin, while no star himself, has at least consistently proven he can drive up the seam and create mismatches Schultz can’t. The defense can’t afford to just let him catch the ball like they usually can with Schultz.

I’m betting Schultz continues to improve, but the biggest leap in improvement has probably already happened with both of these guys.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I'm tempted to say YPC for a RB.

But it's probably batting average in baseball.

There are lots of overrated stats. YPC can be but I find it at least somewhat useful. I mean if your work horse goes below 4 YPC I think it's a sign to worry about.

But passing yards are very overrated in my opinion as opposed to YPA, completion percentage, TD/INT (and fumbles) for example. Receptions for a WR can also be very overrated if a receiver doesn't have the YPC to go with them. Not sure what I would say is the most overrated or useless though. They all have to be put in context.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Schultzy's my guy.

Jarwin might be better at YAC, but Schultz seems about as sure-handed as they come.

The next great Dallas TE.

Schultz isn't explosive like a Kelce or a Kittle but he is a really solid all around TE. I definitely think he has the ability to be a top 10 type TE in the NFL. And he is an all around good TE. Takes a lot for me to say that because I really didn't like some of what he was doing earlier in his career. Last year he really just seemed to get it and moved past the dumb mental errors and missed assignments.

I still like Jarwin too. It's a good problem to have.

 

[boozeman]

I guess it is fun to make light of the mismatch, but that subtle arm point by T.O. was nasty too.

The dude could play, but goddamn whotta bitch.

 

[Cotton]

 

[Genghis Khan]

There are lots of overrated stats. YPC can be but I find it at least somewhat useful. I mean if your work horse goes below 4 YPC I think it's a sign to worry about.

But passing yards are very overrated in my opinion as opposed to YPA, completion percentage, TD/INT (and fumbles) for example. Receptions for a WR can also be very overrated if a receiver doesn't have the YPC to go with them. Not sure what I would say is the most overrated or useless though. They all have to be put in context.

I think receptions are way underrated. It's not the be all end all, but it's a pretty good indicator that a receiver is good at getting open.

I agree that YPC is more overrated than useless. But I think my point is that it's extremely overrated. It's better at identifying if a RB sucks, but once you hit a certain threshold (let's say 4.0), it's pretty much useless.

I actually think passing yards kind of tells you a lot, but I think it requires context and YPA and completion percentage are way more important.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Schultz is very limited though. He’s a jag really. Nothing wrong with that. He had production in 2020 as a 4th or 5th receiving option.

Jarwin, while no star himself, has at least consistently proven he can drive up the seam and create mismatches Schultz can’t. The defense can’t afford to just let him catch the ball like they usually can with Schultz.

I’m betting Schultz continues to improve, but the biggest leap in improvement has probably already happened with both of these guys.

Jarwin has proven jack squat.

Schultz is no superstar, but he put up top 10 TE stats as the 4th or 5th option for mostly 2nd/3rd/4th string QBs. That's leaps and bounds more impressive than anything Jarwin has even in his dreams shown.

Jarwin has gone down the seams a couple of times. Woop de damn doo.

 

[boozeman]

Jarwin has proven jack squat.

Schultz is no superstar, but he put up top 10 TE stats as the 4th or 5th option for mostly 2nd/3rd/4th string QBs. That's leaps and bounds more impressive than anything Jarwin has even in his dreams shown.

Jarwin has gone down the seams a couple of times. Woop de damn doo.

Yeah, I don't really get how people think we are stacked there.

 

[Cotton]

Jarwin has proven jack squat.

Schultz is no superstar, but he put up top 10 TE stats as the 4th or 5th option for mostly 2nd/3rd/4th string QBs. That's leaps and bounds more impressive than anything Jarwin has even in his dreams shown.

Jarwin has gone down the seams a couple of times. Woop de damn doo.

It's a no brainer for me who should start.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Schultz isn't explosive like a Kelce or a Kittle but he is a really solid all around TE. I definitely think he has the ability to be a top 10 type TE in the NFL. And he is an all around good TE. Takes a lot for me to say that because I really didn't like some of what he was doing earlier in his career. Last year he really just seemed to get it and moved past the dumb mental errors and missed assignments.

This is where I'm at. I thought Schultz was completely useless until 2020. He won me over to the point where I now think he's pretty solid.

I was wrong about him.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Yeah, I don't really get how people think we are stacked there.

I think Schultz is solid, Jarwin is a JAG. We're certainly not stacked, but I do think we're plenty good enough at TE especially given how strong we are at WR.

 

[Genghis Khan]

It's a no brainer for me who should start.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think receptions are way underrated. It's not the be all end all, but it's a pretty good indicator that a receiver is good at getting open.

I agree that YPC is more overrated than useless. But I think my point is that it's extremely overrated. It's better at identifying if a RB sucks, but once you hit a certain threshold (let's say 4.0), it's pretty much useless.

I actually think passing yards kind of tells you a lot, but I think it requires context and YPA and completion percentage are way more important.

See receptions are like carries half the time. With all the manifactured screens and short passes where a guy really doesn't do anything to get open I have a hard time putting much stock in it. Plus receptions are a huge result of where the QB throws the ball. You have no receivers for example and those balls are still going to get thrown and some of them will be caught.

 

[Simpleton]

Football is the most subjective sport that lends itself the least to statistics being used as a true barometer given the multitude of variables that are more standardized in other sports.

In that sense I could argue the vast majority of football stats are meaningless to some extent, especially the smaller the sample size.

 

[Genghis Khan]

See receptions are like carries half the time. With all the manifactured screens and short passes where a guy really doesn't do anything to get open I have a hard time putting much stock in it. Plus receptions are a huge result of where the QB throws the ball. You have no receivers for example and those balls are still going to get thrown and some of them will be caught.

Carries are an underrated stat as well.

And no, if the receivers suck and the QB sucks, no those balls aren't getting thrown and caught.

I'm not saying that receptions are the ultimate stat or anything, or that they don't sometimes need context, but they are underrated and certainly not useless or anywhere close to useless.

Look at the top 50 leaders in receptions for a season. I don't think you'll find a single bad receiver on that list. And you'll find many of the modern greats.

https://www.footballdb.com/leaders/season-receiving-receptions



If you catch a lot of balls you're doing a lot right. It's literally the receiver's job.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Carries are an underrated stat as well.

And no, if the receivers suck and the QB sucks, no those balls aren't getting thrown and caught.

I'm not saying that receptions are the ultimate stat or anything, or that they don't sometimes need context, but they are underrated and certainly not useless or anywhere close to useless.

Look at the top 50 leaders in receptions for a season. I don't think you'll find a single bad receiver on that list. And you'll find many of the modern greats.

https://www.footballdb.com/leaders/season-receiving-receptions



If you catch a lot of balls you're doing a lot right. It's literally the receiver's job.

Percy Harvin once caught 87 balls in a season? Was he good? No he was a gadget. It's why he couldn't even top 1000 yards with that many catches.

I guess that's what I'm saying. Some receivers aren't good but get a good number of receptions because the coaches scheme up just getting the ball in their hands.

Shit Wes Welker is on that list multiple times. Was he an Uber talented guy? No he just had a QB that threw him a ton of short easy passes. He was a decent WR in the perfect scenario to get a lot of catches.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Conversely I think receiving yards are way more important. If a guy catches 1 ball for 15 yards and another catches 2 balls for 10. The guy with the 15 yard catch did something more difficult and productive.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Percy Harvin once caught 87 balls in a season? Was he good? No he was a gadget. It's why he couldn't even top 1000 yards with that many catches.

I guess that's what I'm saying. Some receivers aren't good but get a good number of receptions because the coaches scheme up just getting the ball in their hands.

Shit Wes Welker is on that list multiple times. Was he an Uber talented guy? No he just had a QB that threw him a ton of short easy passes. He was a decent WR in the perfect scenario to get a lot of catches.

Percy Harvin isn't on that list. He had a couple decent seasons where the Vikings made a concerted effort to feed him the ball. I never said this was the be all end all, in fact I specifically said it wasn't and sometimes needs context.

Welker? Good Christ. He was among the better receivers of his generation.

You can cherry pick seasons here and there and most stats have anomalies.

Again, look at the list. The top 50 reception seasons are almost all from top receivers of their eras.

If you don't get open on a consistent basis you really aren't a good receiver and receptions generally reflect that. As I've said several times, it's not a perfect stat but it's a pretty telling one.

This discussion started with talking about the most useless stat in sports.

You offered up receptions as an example of a useless stat. It is far, far, far from a useless stat.

And in fact, when you look at the all time reception seasons leaders, there's a pretty strong correlation between receptions and receiver quality.