2021 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

[Cowboysrock55]

This is a straw man.

No one that I'm aware of is arguing that you want 6.5 YPC as you are implying here.

Just like you aren't arguing in favor of a guy with 10 catches for 1000 yards.

If you think we're arguing in favor of 80 catches, 500 yards (6.5 YPC) then you're missing the point even worse than I thought.

Sure I'm using extremes to point out how useless catches are as a statistic on their own. It's a stat that has no value without adding another stat in with it. Which is my exact point. It's why both of you guys have to bring in other stats to justify why the catches are import.

It's not like TDs, Yards, drops, fumbles and so forth that are all valuable stats without needing to know about catches.

 

[data]

Although real world examples, the previous two examples were moreso outliers so this third example of more typical stats may provide better insight.

Below, both WRs have similar yardage totals, but differ with a more typical range YPC and receptions.

Who would you rather have?
Receiver A: 127 rec, 1535 yards (12.1 YPC)
Receiver B: 98 rec, 1519 yards (15.5 YPC)

 

[Cowboysrock55]

It actually says zero about catches.

Because you don't need to know about catches, they are useless. Kind of the point of all this. I really feel like you guys get it but are going straight Schmitty can't admit you know your view was wrong.

 

[Cotton]

Although real world examples, the previous two examples were more so outliers so this third example of more typical s may provide better insight.

Below, both WRs have similar yardage totals, but differ with YPC and receptions.

Who would you rather have?
Receiver A: 127 rec, 1535 yards (12.1 YPC)
Receiver B: 98 rec, 1519 yards (15.5 YPC)

I take Receiver A 10 times out of 10.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Although real world examples, the previous two examples were more so outliers so this third example of more typical s may provide better insight.

Below, both WRs have similar yardage totals, but differ with YPC and receptions.

Who would you rather have?
Receiver A: 127 rec, 1535 yards (12.1 YPC)
Receiver B: 98 rec, 1519 yards (15.5 YPC)

I'd probably take B but can't say for certain without know more stats. I don't need the catches to decide it at all though.

If player B took more targets I'd take A. Or if A scored more TDs I'd take A.

Don't care about the catches.

 

[Cotton]

but are going straight Schmitty can't admit you know your view was wrong.

Okay, counselor.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Totally off topic but I actually think yards per target is an underrated stat. More useful than yards per catch.

 

[Cotton]

Totally off topic but I actually think yards per target is an underrated stat. More useful than yards per catch.

Michael Thomas (you brought him up) - 9.1 yards/target

Jerry Rice - 8.4 yards/target

Choose your fighter.

 

[Cotton]

Tyreek Hill - 9.8 yards/target

Jerry Rice - 8.4 yards per target

Choose your fighter.

 

[Genghis Khan]

No not really otherwise the all time receptions holder in a season would be Jerry Rice and not Michael Thomas.

You really can't compare across eras and obviously there are other factors.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Although real world examples, the previous two examples were more so outliers so this third example of more typical s may provide better insight.

Below, both WRs have similar yardage totals, but differ with YPC and receptions.

Who would you rather have?
Receiver A: 127 rec, 1535 yards (12.1 YPC)
Receiver B: 98 rec, 1519 yards (15.5 YPC)

A, but again both receivers are fantastic.

In this case the difference in catches makes the difference.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Michael Thomas (you brought him up) - 9.1 yards/target

Jerry Rice - 8.4 yards/target

Choose your fighter.

Interesting. I'd still take Jerry Rice.

Better WR, 69 catches 1313 yards or 101 catches 1377 yards.

One is Anquon Boldin and one is Randy Moss. I've never seen a rookie year as impressive to me as what Moss did. What Boldin did was impressive but Randy Moss was unstoppable.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You really can't compare across eras and obviously there are other factors.

Yeah I agree on that point. Teams pass the ball way more now. Which leads to more catches. But not better receivers. And of course the defensive rules are enforced totally differently now.

 

[data]

I'd probably take B but can't say for certain without know more stats. I don't need the catches to decide it at all though.

If player B took more targets I'd take A. Or if A scored more TDs I'd take A.

Don't care about the catches.

No, you don’t get targets or TDs, nor catchable passes or success rate (down and distance). If the information provided isn’t enough for you to decide one or the other, that’s fine. It just insinuates that both catches and yards are equally useless (or useful).

Here’s a stat — One is a white guy.

 

[Cotton]

No, you don’t get targets or TDs. If the information provided isn’t enough for you to decide one or the other, that’s fine. It just insinuates that both catches and yards are equally useless (or useful).

Here’s a stat — One is a white guy.

The white guy is most likely Wes Welker. The black guy is most likely Rice.

Player A = Welker

Player B = Rice

 

[data]

The white guy is most likely Wes Welker. The black guy is most likely Rice.

Player A = Welker

Player B = Rice

nope

 

[data]

...and I’m not a fan of you three bringing in names because it hurts, not helps, the discussion.

 

[Cotton]

nope

I'd bet money I got at least half of it right.

 

[data]

I'd bet money I got at least half of it right.

nope

 

[p1_]

It's been a while since we had a little dust up. This is fun.

And no Schmitty or LT to be seen. Imagine that.