Don't look now, but Fitzpatrick is tied for 9th in the NFL in TD&#

[TheFunPolice]

lol... people are still arguing about Ryan Fitzpatrick

 

How many truly good NFL QBs are there where the fanbase is at each others throats over whether the guy is any good or not?

[Bronc24]

lol... people are still arguing about Ryan Fitzpatrick

 

How many truly good NFL QBs are there where the fanbase is at each others throats over whether the guy is any good or not?

 

lol THIS! ^^^^^^^^^^^

[gumby]

Alphadawg why do you bother? You'll never convince some people. It's because you use logic to prove your point and they use emotion.

It's just like you couldn't go to a Justin Bieber concert and convince a 12 year old teenybopper that the music is no good. They don't want to hear it.

It's the same mindset that creates threads like this or the one about feeling sorry for Fitzpatrick. It doesn't matter what stats you use. As one emotional poster said here he doesn't even understand half of what the stats at ESPN mean. They'd rather just clutch their pom-poms ever so tightly and blindly cheer for a player.

[PromoTheRobot]

Alphadawg why do you bother? You'll never convince some people. It's because you use logic to prove your point and they use emotion.

It's just like you couldn't go to a Justin Bieber concert and convince a 12 year old teenybopper that the music is no good. They don't want to hear it.

It's the same mindset that creates threads like this or the one about feeling sorry for Fitzpatrick. It doesn't matter what stats you use. As one emotional poster said here he doesn't even understand half of what the stats at ESPN mean. They'd rather just clutch their pom-poms ever so tightly and blindly cheer for a player.

 

Logic. That's hilarious.

 

I guess it's logic when someone tries to argue that Fitz is not the worst QB ever that equates to wanting to have Fitz's baby.

 

PTR

Edited December 7, 2012 by PromoTheRobot

[Alphadawg7]

Alphadawg why do you bother? You'll never convince some people. It's because you use logic to prove your point and they use emotion.

It's just like you couldn't go to a Justin Bieber concert and convince a 12 year old teenybopper that the music is no good. They don't want to hear it.

It's the same mindset that creates threads like this or the one about feeling sorry for Fitzpatrick. It doesn't matter what stats you use. As one emotional poster said here he doesn't even understand half of what the stats at ESPN mean. They'd rather just clutch their pom-poms ever so tightly and blindly cheer for a player.

 

I know, you are totally right, its a pointless battle. Yet I cant help myself when people try and validate the losing and make excuses year after year. The "we are 9th in rushing attempts" thread is a perfect example...I already put an end to that debate and showed flat out with 100% accuracy that when we run we win, when we pass we lose. To the tune of 100% of the time this year. Anyone wants to see the game by game breakdown on the season I believe its on the second page of that thread. But here are summary of the stats for people who seem to still think we run enough and dont want to go to that thread...

 

We are 5-0 when we either have near a 50/50 split of pass to run or a higher number of runs to passes. In fact in 5 wins, its almost a 60-40 split of carries to passes.

 

We are 0-7 when we have a higher number of passes than runs. In fact in 7 losses the ratio is 60-40 split of passes to runs. And no, we did not have to throw to get back in all those games. Only 2 games got grossly out of hand early...Jets and SF. All the other ones, were winnable games deep into the 2nd half where running was more than acceptable and was the most effective thing we had going but just didnt do it.

 

Even more interesting, when the split was right at 50/50 we barely won and had close games. In the 2 games where we had way more carries to passes we won big and dominated the game.

 

Yet that thread continues with people arguing its a myth that we dont run enough...lol

 

Logic. That's hilarious.

 

I guess it's logic when someone tries to argue that Fitz is not the worst QB ever that equates to wanting to have Fitz's baby.

 

PTR

 

No joke, this post made me really laugh out loud...so much so I felt typing "LOL" would not do it justice and had to write the whole thing out. I mean you are the same guy that in the shout box this week after Fitz threw an INT you referred to him being an Elite QB like Brees who had just threw 5 INTs the Thursday night game to defend the horrendous throw Fitz had just made for an INT.

 

But you are right...you are logical

Edited December 7, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[Maury Ballstein]

I know, you are totally right, its a pointless battle. Yet I cant help myself when people try and validate the losing and make excuses year after year. This thread is a perfect example...I already put an end to this debate and showed flat out with 100% accuracy that when we run we win, when we pass we lose. To the tune of 100% of the time this year. Anyone wants to see the game by game breakdown on the season I believe its on the second page of this thread. But here are summary of the stats for people who seem to still think we run enough.

 

We are 5-0 when we either have near a 50/50 split of pass to run or a higher number of runs to passes. In fact in 5 wins, its almost a 60-40 split of carries to passes.

 

We are 0-7 when we have a higher number of passes than runs. In fact in 7 losses the ratio is 60-40 split of passes to runs. And no, we did not have to throw to get back in all those games. Only 2 games got grossly out of hand early...Jets and SF. All the other ones, were winnable games deep into the 2nd half where running was more than acceptable and was the most effective thing we had going but just didnt do it.

 

Even more interesting, when the split was right at 50/50 we barely won and had close games. In the 2 games where we had way more carries to passes we won big and dominated the game.

 

Yet this thread continues...

 

 

 

No joke, this post made me really laugh out loud...so much so I felt typing "LOL" would not do it justice and had to write the whole thing out. I mean you are the same guy that in the shout box this week after Fitz threw an INT you referred to him being an Elite QB like Brees who had just threw 5 INTs the Thursday night game to defend the horrendous throw Fitz had just made for an INT.

 

But you are right...you are logical

 

Please say this didn't happen......Brees and Fitz comparison? wheres Cris Carter at ? COME ON MAN.

[gumby]

Logic. That's hilarious.

 

I guess it's logic when someone tries to argue that Fitz is not the worst QB ever that equates to wanting to have Fitz's baby.

 

PTR

 

 

oh look..the troll came out from under his bridge.

[Alphadawg7]

oh look..the troll came out from under his bridge.

 

Is it me, or is Promo showing a lot of similarities to Dog14787 and his love affair with Trent with some of the things he says and does in relation to Fitz?

[PromoTheRobot]

 

 

I know, you are totally right, its a pointless battle. Yet I cant help myself when people try and validate the losing and make excuses year after year. The "we are 9th in rushing attempts" thread is a perfect example...I already put an end to that debate and showed flat out with 100% accuracy that when we run we win, when we pass we lose. To the tune of 100% of the time this year. Anyone wants to see the game by game breakdown on the season I believe its on the second page of that thread. But here are summary of the stats for people who seem to still think we run enough and dont want to go to that thread...

 

We are 5-0 when we either have near a 50/50 split of pass to run or a higher number of runs to passes. In fact in 5 wins, its almost a 60-40 split of carries to passes.

 

We are 0-7 when we have a higher number of passes than runs. In fact in 7 losses the ratio is 60-40 split of passes to runs. And no, we did not have to throw to get back in all those games. Only 2 games got grossly out of hand early...Jets and SF. All the other ones, were winnable games deep into the 2nd half where running was more than acceptable and was the most effective thing we had going but just didnt do it.

 

Even more interesting, when the split was right at 50/50 we barely won and had close games. In the 2 games where we had way more carries to passes we won big and dominated the game.

 

Yet that thread continues with people arguing its a myth that we dont run enough...lol

 

 

 

No joke, this post made me really laugh out loud...so much so I felt typing "LOL" would not do it justice and had to write the whole thing out. I mean you are the same guy that in the shout box this week after Fitz threw an INT you referred to him being an Elite QB like Brees who had just threw 5 INTs the Thursday night game to defend the horrendous throw Fitz had just made for an INT.

 

But you are right...you are logical

 

And you lack simple reading comprehension skills because that wasn't my point about Fitz/Brees at all. My point was that you hyperventilate over every pass Fitz throws, while QBs like Brees are capable of crapping the bed in games.

 

PTR

[bobobonators]

The mob mentality on these boards is amazing. A thread about our QB being tied for 9th in TD's turns into this..damn people. Are we only supposed to read 32258543 threads about how much this team sucks? No wonder bigcat and others bounced from here

[Alphadawg7]

The mob mentality on these boards is amazing. A thread about our QB being tied for 9th in TD's turns into this..damn people. Are we only supposed to read 32258543 threads about how much this team sucks? No wonder bigcat and others bounced from here

 

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because this thread was started to misrepresent the consistency and effectiveness of a QB who is one if the lowest rated QBs in the NFL and the majority of members and fans are tired of seeing a losing product accepted and validated through excuses.

 

And I think it's hilarious that people like you complain about the number of threads on Fitz and stuff yet still start them and then are shocked when people on both sides of the discussion participate, especially given he is the 25th ranked QB and the bills are 5-7. And guess who ranked Fitz 25th...FItz did, not fans, not media...but Fitz because its not an opinion ranking, it's a ranking based on his individual performance on the field.

[bobobonators]

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because this thread was started to misrepresent the consistency and effectiveness of a QB who is one if the lowest rated QBs in the NFL and the majority of members and fans are tired of seeing a losing product accepted and validated through excuses.

 

And I think it's hilarious that people like you complain about the number of threads on Fitz and stuff yet still start them and then are shocked when people on both sides of the discussion participate, especially given he is the 25th ranked QB and the bills are 5-7. And guess who ranked Fitz 25th...FItz did, not fans, not media...but Fitz because its not an opinion ranking, it's a ranking based on his individual performance on the field.

 

Just stop dude. The thread wasn't misrepresenting anything. I wasn't comparing and contrasting different stats and specifically leaving out other stats...the thread simply related to TOUCHDOWNS for ****'S SAKE..give it up already.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

LOL Yeah number of Tds definately doesn't correlate with winning...just look at the number of teams that win every week with no Tds......

 

wha?

 

Are you gentleman familiar with the statistical concept of R value?

 

It's a fact that if you plot #team wins against #QB TDs**, the R value is <0.5, (R^2 = 0.264), which is typically considered to be "random chance"

It's also a fact that if you plot # team wins against total Team TD, the R value is <0.7 (R^2 = 0.471), which is starting to border on meaning.

 

If someone can tell me how to paste in stuff from Excel, I can happily share the visual of the plot which is pretty d*mned convincing- otherwise, y'all can:

1) take my word that it's twoo, it's twoo, it's really twoo

2) pull the numbers off ESPN or NFL.com and see that as of today, you get exactly the same values I do

 

Look, it's really not that shocking if you think about it. All it means is that football is a team sport, and that winning is related to scoring more points than the other guys, not just scoring more points yourself. And in the process of scoring more points, it doesn't much matter if they come from FG, rushing TD, or passing TD.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because this thread was started to misrepresent the consistency and effectiveness of a QB who is one if the lowest rated QBs .. especially given he is the 25th ranked QB and the bills are 5-7. And guess who ranked Fitz 25th...FItz did, not fans, not media...but Fitz because its not an opinion ranking, it's a ranking based on his individual performance on the field.

 

Dawg, if you're gonna talk about misrepresenting, mind sharing the source of that ranking? Because by QB rating he's currently 17th, by % completion 19th tD 10th, etc etc.

If you're talking about some new-fandangled statisticrunchidoodle, it's chill but it's also up for discussion what it really means - it just doesn't look good to waltz about chiding others for misrepresenting, without being clear what you're talking about yourself, KWIM?

[Alphadawg7]

Dawg, if you're gonna talk about misrepresenting, mind sharing the source of that ranking? Because by QB rating he's currently 17th, by % completion 19th tD 10th, etc etc.

If you're talking about some new-fandangled statisticrunchidoodle, it's chill but it's also up for discussion what it really means - it just doesn't look good to waltz about chiding others for misrepresenting, without being clear what you're talking about yourself, KWIM?

 

It's been shared and in this thread...it's on ESPN and its the QBR score and its what has become the beat gauge of a players performance on the field in terms of the QB. Totals are a poor stat to gauge how a player has played overall, as they literally of zero indication of well a player plays week to week. He is ranked 25th on the QBR system developed by ESPN. And before you knock QBR I suggest you go read about it as its by far the best representation of what a QB has done on the field and is now one of the key things analysts, coaches, scouts, GMs etc look at when evaluating a QB. It's just like the PER ESPN developed for the NBA. I think if you did, you would like it, especially if you are a stats guy.

 

And FWIW, Fitz being ranked 17 on that other list is still in the bottom 50% of the league which is still very poor and failing. But the old rating system has been disregarded by everyone except fans and media. No coach, front office, scout etc has cared about the old QB rating score for decades as it has no real value to them in what they need to know about how effective a QB really is.

 

And actually, I am very clear of what I am talking about, but because you dont understand or know what QBR is (surprised actually because its literally referred to week in and week out on just about any show talking about football and the QB) you want to accuse me of now being clear of what I am talking about? No offense, you not understanding it doesn't make me unclear to what it is.

 

And I will ask you the same honest question bobonators refused to answer like 5 times in regards to evaluating totals. Fitz threw 7 TDs in 2 divisional games against Jets and NE. Pretty impressive totals huh, looks good on paper. What that doesn't tell you is that the 3 TDs he threw in Jets game all came in the 4th when we were down 41-3 and that another came late in NE game when game was over essentially and we were down huge. It also doesn't tell you he threw 7 INTs and had a fumble in those 2 games. It also doesn't tell you that Fitz couldnt sustain a drive to save his life in the first half of the Jets game nor the 2nd half of the NE game.

 

So I ask you...how important really are those "impressive" TD totals? What was more significant...the 7 TDs, 4 of which came at meaningless moments when nothing mattered, or the 7 INTS that occurred throughout the games when it really did matter? And before you or someone else replies about how it wasnt all Fitz's fault, be clear I am not talking about how we lost the game...we are evaluating Fitz's individual performance, just like him being 9th in total TD's is an individual performance statistic for him.

 

This is why things like his total TDs are a silly stat to gauge his performance or anyone elses. And in Chans system he will produce TDs, even Thigpen was ranked 13th in the NFL for his total TDs and he had never started a game before that season as a 2nd year QB...but I have yet to see you or anyone say Thigpen is even a good back up let alone a good starter. KC also won just one game that year...sounds familiar...QB in Chans system with solid TD totals yet can't win many games.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[Alphadawg7]

Just stop dude. The thread wasn't misrepresenting anything. I wasn't comparing and contrasting different stats and specifically leaving out other stats...the thread simply related to TOUCHDOWNS for ****'S SAKE..give it up already.

 

Actually no, you made it about more when people were unimpressed about him being ranked 9th in TD's and you chose to mock everyone as if we are somehow saying TD's aren't important. You also clearly had an agenda, and its very evident in your previous posts, that the point of your thread was to elevate what Fitz has done on the field by choosing a single stat to magnify that. You were being an ass to anyone who wasn't impressed by him being ranked 9th in total TD's and clearly using that number to validate Fitz. In fact, you refused to even participate in valid discussions and answer fair questions and instead just mock the questions and be an ass. You get what you put out bud.

 

And put your big boy pants on...if you are going to start a thread on such a controversial topic like Fitz among the frustrated fan base, then you should be prepared to have people who don't agree participate in the thread. Just like you jump in to defend Fitz in every negative thread about Fitz. I will admit, I do find it hilarious when posters like you pretty much resort to dodging real info and just mock others when they make valid points or ask you valid questions. Its even funnier when you then complain about it

Edited December 8, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[Maury Ballstein]

Yea come on don't drop a this is why people leave tbd............over items like this thread where some people poke holes in your Fitz is really swell thread.

 

A lot of folks out there do not share that same belief.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

It's been shared and in this thread...it's on ESPN and its the QBR score and its what has become the beat gauge of a players performance on the field in terms of the QB.

 

"Beat gauge"?

 

OK, OK, no spelling police.

 

My point stands - if you want to chide others for being "misleading", I think it's pretty ironic when you post something which looks misleading itself.

Which stating Fitz is "25th in the league" without stating the criteria, when several of the common statistics found on common websites disagree, appears to be.

 

And FWIW, Fitz being ranked 17 on that other list is still in the bottom 50% of the league which is still very poor and failing. But the old rating system has been disregarded by everyone except fans and media. No coach, front office, scout etc has cared about the old QB rating score for decades as it has no real value to them in what they need to know about how effective a QB really is.

 

Fitz being ranked 17th on the list of about 34 QB is exactly average (there typically being no significant difference +/-2), which is exactly what most of us think he is.

 

You may be correct that coaches and front offices disregard the conventional QB rating. The points are:

1) it is still very widespread, thus if you're talking about something else, you need to say what it is

2) it's not at all clear to many of us that the "total QBR" is really measuring QB effectiveness

 

And actually, I am very clear of what I am talking about, but because you dont understand or know what QBR is (surprised actually because its literally referred to week in and week out on just about any show talking about football and the QB) you want to accuse me of now being clear of what I am talking about? No offense, you not understanding it doesn't make me unclear to what it is.

 

I'd like to buy a clue for Alphadawg. Let me speak very slowly and use small words. Stating that you look like a fool to call others misleading when you are stating something as a fact, without identifying what metric you're referring to and your "fact" is contradicted by several other metrics, does not mean I don't know what total QBR is or understand what total QBR is. Disagreeing with you or others that it's the new be-all and end-all metric for QB effectiveness does not mean I don't know what total QBR is or understand what total QBR is. Imputing to me a position I have not stated or implied is called a "straw man" in debating circles and is generally considered lame.

 

As far as the meaning TD statistics are concerned, my view on that is already on record several times in this thread. I'll restate for your convenience:

# of QB TDs has no meaningful correlation with # team wins. Fact.

# team TDs has minimal correlation with team wins. Fact.

[Alphadawg7]

"Beat gauge"?

 

OK, OK, no spelling police.

 

My point stands - if you want to chide others for being "misleading", I think it's pretty ironic when you post something which looks misleading itself.

Which stating Fitz is "25th in the league" without stating the criteria, when several of the common statistics found on common websites disagree, appears to be.

 

 

 

Fitz being ranked 17th on the list of about 34 QB is exactly average (there typically being no significant difference +/-2), which is exactly what most of us think he is.

 

You may be correct that coaches and front offices disregard the conventional QB rating. The points are:

1) it is still very widespread, thus if you're talking about something else, you need to say what it is

2) it's not at all clear to many of us that the "total QBR" is really measuring QB effectiveness

 

 

 

I'd like to buy a clue for Alphadawg. Let me speak very slowly and use small words. Stating that you look like a fool to call others misleading when you are stating something as a fact, without identifying what metric you're referring to and your "fact" is contradicted by several other metrics, does not mean I don't know what total QBR is or understand what total QBR is. Disagreeing with you or others that it's the new be-all and end-all metric for QB effectiveness does not mean I don't know what total QBR is or understand what total QBR is. Imputing to me a position I have not stated or implied is called a "straw man" in debating circles and is generally considered lame.

 

As far as the meaning TD statistics are concerned, my view on that is already on record several times in this thread. I'll restate for your convenience:

# of QB TDs has no meaningful correlation with # team wins. Fact.

# team TDs has minimal correlation with team wins. Fact.

 

Hopeful, I am really trying to be just straight up with you...no smart ass antics, nothing...not even responding to some of the condescending things you are choosing to say that you feel is best to be an ass about. But I will say this...BEFORE you advise me of citing things without clarifying where its from, what it is, etc etc and chastise me for it, why dont you try reading this thread first, or at the very least the posts I made earlier.

 

I already talked in length about it, posted a link to it, etc etc. Just because you chose to join the conversation late doesnt mean it wasn't already discussed. Why should I be obligated to restate everything that has already been stated and clarified multiple times in this thread because you were too lazy to read it all? There is also google to help you figure out what it is too...

 

Look I get it, its a long thread, and I usually dont go through every post either. But I am also not mocking you for something I claim you didnt say when you already did.

 

PS: How anyone isnt familiar with QBR which is been around a bit now and is constantly talked about on every sports show, pregame show, post game show, half time report, etc is a bit surprising. But like I said, already posted info about it and where to find it for those who care. Still doesnt change its significance relative to how Fitz has performed on the field.

 

PPS: Cant help but notice you too played the dodge game and refused to answer the very questions I asked you...guess they were not very clear either...or maybe it was just that they make too much sense and you are struggling to find an answer that supports what ever it is you want dispute (which still isnt even clear).

Edited December 8, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[Alphadawg7]

How did that "9th in total TD's" thing work out this weekend? Oh year, 1 more TD and one more INT (should have been 3 INT's but who's counting right).

 

But he is really good right, he is 9th in total TD's. Never mind he just put up 12 points at home with the season on the line against a 5 win team and then ended the game with his patented game ending INT (I believe that is 4 now on the year at the end of games we could still win or tie). Never mind he led the offense to just three 3rd down conversions.

 

And here is WHY the old rating system is worthless and the new QBR rating score is far superior. His rating under the old QB rating was 93.9 which seems pretty good...however is QBR for the game was an atrocious 41.3 which was right in line with his season overall QBR that has him ranked in the bottom 25% of the league.

 

Why? Because QBR takes into account important factors in the game about a QB's effectiveness and is a substantially more accurate gauge to how a guy did on the field. If a QB under the old rating system threw 40 screens and completed 38 of them his rating would be through the roof. However, that QB likely loses huge and was totally ineffective and produced very few sustained drives, first downs, 3rd down conversions, etc etc.

[KOKBILLS]

And you lack simple reading comprehension skills because that wasn't my point about Fitz/Brees at all. My point was that you hyperventilate over every pass Fitz throws, while QBs like Brees are capable of crapping the bed in games.

 

PTR

 

Well...That's probably because QB's like Brees regularly follow up poor performances with REAL good ones, then another good one, and so on...Brady has bad Games...Rodgers too...But you know damn well they are going to even those out and then some...Fitz? Not so much...

 

I swear I don't want to be a dick about this whole Fitz thing with other Bills Fans...But if you can sit and watch Fitzpatrick over these three years and come away thinking he's good enough...Well...I don't know what to say to you...You're watching a different game than I am...And that's not to say that Fitz can't do some things well, and have a great game every now and again...It is saying that over an extended period you get what you get with Fitz...And it's never, ever going to be good enough...