Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

The Chandler catch was the most "clutch" on that game winning drive.

 

I don't see how a 4th down catch is bigger than the game-winner.

 

For that matter, is Hogan clutch for his leaping grab to set up the winner?

 

Personally, I find it pointless to rate the "clutchness" of key plays on a game winning drive; they all matter.

 

The post I responded to claimed that Watkins hasn't made a big play in a crucial situation; the game winner against Minnesota clearly qualifies as that IMO

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

I don't see how a 4th down catch is bigger than the game-winner.

 

For that matter, is Hogan clutch for his leaping grab to set up the winner?

 

Personally, I find it pointless to rate the "clutchness" of key plays on a game winning drive; they all matter.

 

The post I responded to claimed that Watkins hasn't made a big play in a crucial situation; the game winner against Minnesota clearly qualifies as that IMO

 

The win probabilty before that 4th and 20 was 4%.

 

Win probabilty boosts from 4-32%. It was the defining play with the lowest statistical percentage of it happening. I also remeber the throw from Orton was wild and Chandler made an incredible one handed catch on the run. Game is over without that play.

 

After the Hogan catch the win probabilty boosted to 83%. There was also a penalty before that play that dropped the win % in the 20's.

 

Chandler and Hogan should be called "clutch" players too then. :w00t:

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

 

The win probabilty before that 4th and 20 was 4%.

 

Win probabilty boosts from 4-32%. It was the defining play with the lowest statistical percentage of it happening. I also remeber the throw from Orton was wild and Chandler made an incredible one handed catch on the run. Game is over without that play.

 

After the Hogan catch the win probabilty boosted to 83%. There was also a penalty before that play that dropped the win % in the 20's.

 

Chandler and Hogan should be called "clutch" players too then. :w00t:

Perhaps you missed the last sentence of my last post.

 

Ranking the "clutchness" of those plays is immaterial.

 

You are also misremembering the Chandler catch. It wasn't wild; he bobbled it:

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000413645/Week-7-Vikings-vs-Bills-highlights

 

You can choose to marginalize the importance of the game-winning catch for reasons tangential to the discussion of you wish; I believe that makes no sense, particularly in the context of this discussion.

Posted

Bills receivers, ranked:

​1)Watkins
​2) Clay
​3) McCoy
4) Hogan
5) Woods
​6) Easley

​What the Bills think of their receivers

​1) Woods
2) Hogan
​3) McCoy
​4) Watkins
5) Clay

Posted

Bills receivers, ranked:

​1)Watkins

​2) Clay

​3) McCoy

4) Hogan

5) Woods

​6) Easley

​What the Bills think of their receivers

​1) Woods

2) Hogan

​3) McCoy

​4) Watkins

5) Clay

I love reading posts like these, critiques of our system based in the assumption that our flawed QB makes every read correctly and is executing plays and scheme to perfection.

Posted

Perhaps you missed the last sentence of my last post.

 

Ranking the "clutchness" of those plays is immaterial.

 

You are also misremembering the Chandler catch. It wasn't wild; he bobbled it:

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000413645/Week-7-Vikings-vs-Bills-highlights

 

You can choose to marginalize the importance of the game-winning catch for reasons tangential to the discussion of you wish; I believe that makes no sense, particularly in the context of this discussion.

 

Casual fans often miss the finer points. :pirate:

Posted (edited)

Perhaps you missed the last sentence of my last post.

 

Ranking the "clutchness" of those plays is immaterial.

 

You are also misremembering the Chandler catch. It wasn't wild; he bobbled it:

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000413645/Week-7-Vikings-vs-Bills-highlights

 

You can choose to marginalize the importance of the game-winning catch for reasons tangential to the discussion of you wish; I believe that makes no sense, particularly in the context of this discussion.

 

My point is your example in the Minnesota game does not make Watkins a "clutch" player.

 

Casual fans often miss the finer points. :pirate:

 

Casual fans bought into the hype of flashy names and thought this was a playoff team going into the season and now because the teams expecations have faultered are blaming it on Rex.

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

 

My point is your example in the Minnesota game does not make Watkins a "clutch" player.

 

 

Casual fans bought into the hype of flashy names and thought this was a playoff team going into the season.

Ok, so game-winning catches don't make a guy a clutch player because someone else also contributed on the game-winning drive?

 

What about when he made the circus catch to beat Detroit 3 weeks prior?

 

There doesn't seem to be any defined logic at work here, so please define it for me: what, exactly, makes a clutch player if not making game-winning plays?

 

Or is it possible that the whole idea of defining a guy as clutch is silly to begin with because every single play in the game matters?

Posted

Casual fans bought into the hype of flashy names and thought this was a playoff team going into the season and now because the teams expecations have faultered are blaming it on Rex.

 

:lol: Your definition of casual needs work, friend. :beer:

Ok, so game-winning catches don't make a guy a clutch player because someone else also contributed on the game-winning drive?

 

What about when he made the circus catch to beat Detroit 3 weeks prior?

 

There doesn't seem to be any defined logic at work here, so please define it for me: what, exactly, makes a clutch player if not making game-winning plays?

 

Or is it possible that the whole idea of defining a guy as clutch is silly to begin with because every single play in the game matters?

 

Casual fans don't do logic. They do emotional outrage.

Posted (edited)

Ok, so game-winning catches don't make a guy a clutch player because someone else also contributed on the game-winning drive?

 

What about when he made the circus catch to beat Detroit 3 weeks prior?

 

There doesn't seem to be any defined logic at work here, so please define it for me: what, exactly, makes a clutch player if not making game-winning plays?

 

Or is it possible that the whole idea of defining a guy as clutch is silly to begin with because every single play in the game matters?

 

An example of a game-winning catch doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call James Hardy a "clutch" WR

An exampe of a circus catch doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call David Tyree a "clutch" WR and he even helped win a superbowl. Just like I wouldn't call Hogan and Chandler "clutch".

 

The idea of "clutch" as being silly is the most accurate statement.

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

 

An example of a game-winning catche doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call James Hardy a "clutch" WR

An exampe of a circus catch doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call David Tyree a "clutch" WR and he even helped win a superbowl. Just like I wouldn't call Hogan and Chandler "clutch".

 

The idea of "clutch" as being silly is the most accurate statement.

 

But Sammy making three game winning catches (Minnesota, Detroit, and the Jets this year) means nothing! NOTHING! :lol:

Posted (edited)

 

But Sammy making three game winning catches (Minnesota, Detroit, and the Jets this year) means nothing! NOTHING! :lol:

 

Since this statement is false it in fact doesn't mean anything.

Edited by BuffaloBillsForever
Posted

 

Since this statement is false it in fact doesn't mean anything.

 

Sammy didn't catch the game winners in those games? For a guy who claims not to be a casual fan, you sure have a casual memory of the games the Bills have played. :lol:

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/buffalo-bills/0ap3000000405801/Sammy-Watkins-tips-to-himself

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/kyle-orton-finds-sammy-watkins-for-game-winning-td-in-final-seconds-203454008.html

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25372374/look-watkins-absolutely-burned-revis-with-the-game-on-the-line

Posted

 

An example of a game-winning catch doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call James Hardy a "clutch" WR

An exampe of a circus catch doesn't make a guy clutch. I don't think anyone would call David Tyree a "clutch" WR and he even helped win a superbowl. Just like I wouldn't call Hogan and Chandler "clutch".

 

The idea of "clutch" as being silly is the most accurate statement.

Then wouldn't it be more genuine of you to simply state that you don't believe in clutch players rather than to debate the merits of one player point by idiosyncratic point?

Posted

Then wouldn't it be more genuine of you to simply state that you don't believe in clutch players rather than to debate the merits of one player point by idiosyncratic point?

 

It would be more genuine, but it wouldn't serve his crusade: Whaley bad, Sammy bad, McCoy bad, anyone who doesn't agree with him is a casual fan. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Posted

 

All I have to do is look at the first link to prove my point that sammy didn't catch the game winner. The game was won by Dan Carpenter.

Posted

 

All I have to do is look at the first link to prove my point that sammy didn't catch the game winner. The game was won by Dan Carpenter.

 

Who could never have made the kick if Sammy doesn't make that catch. :rolleyes:

 

But again, casual fans often miss the finer points of the game. It's okay, football is hard to understand sometimes. :beer:

×
×
  • Create New...