Perry Turtle
-
Posts
910 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Perry Turtle
-
-
50 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:
To add to it Hasek has 6 Vezina, more than any goalie in the voting era and the only guy with more than half that is Broduer who has 4. Hasek should have been a 3 time Hart trophy winner since his best year he did not win it.
You also have to consider his gold medal, which vaulted him onto the world stage. It would be interesting to see a new list and where he would rank. Leading the Sabres to the Cup was no easy feat, and sure he played on a loaded Red Wings team, but most Cup winning goalies play on a loaded team (Fuhr, Roy, Billy Smith, Dryden).
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, FireChans said:
It’s actually net points in tiebreakers, and turnovers can lead to opponents scoring, so you’re wrong again unfortunately.
Try again lol
Yeah, points scored in loses still impact net points, so you're statement about points in loses not counting is still hysterically and hopelessly WRONG.
Things that can lead to opponents scoring: turnovers, failed 4th downs, net punt average, average rush yards against, average pass yards against, pass percentage against, defensive penalties taken, field goal percentage against, offense penalties taken in your own end zone, average opponent field start, kick-off yards surrendered.
Know what all of these have in common? Not a single one of them is used in any tie break scenario. So nice try, but WRONG again.
So enough grasping at straws rabbit. You have the gun. Try not to blow your own head off in explaining why those turnovers in the Bills win against the Chargers matter.
Make it fact based. No "what ifs" or "alternative game" theory. You claim that EVERY turnover matters unconditionally. So why do those Bills turnovers matter?
-
Just now, oldmanfan said:
I’m not accusing Josh of being dumb. I think he’s an incredible QB and can improve even more. You are the one who seems to think we have to take him as he is and that he has no room for improvement.
oh and the Jets game? The reason it was tied at the end of regulation? Josh’s picks. He even said he lost the game because of them. He’s a big boy, you don’t have to defend him as if he’s a saint.
If this is Allen's ceiling, I'll take it every day of the week. If can improve, great, but I'll take him as-is, interceptions and all.
That Jets game is Allen's floor. Sure he took blame. He's a stand up guy. But three interceptions and he still leads the team to force overtime, at a time where it looked like nothing was working for him.
He plays 'bad' and the team isn't getting blown out, instead they're battling for the win on the final drive.
If the Bills had a healthy defense this season, with Milano, Jones, and White, I would be laying money on them left and right to win the Super Bowl.
In my mind, he doesn't need to improve. He just needs to play his game. If he does improve, great, but I think he's pretty locked in right now.
-
1 minute ago, Man with No Name said:
everybody is beatable. good coaching, great adjustments will be the difference maker when it's all said and done this year. Right now, everybody's weaknesses have been exposed. who will cover them the best.
It's a week-to-week, match-up league
-
7 minutes ago, FireChans said:
If TO’s don’t matter in wins, then TD’s don’t matter in losses.
You really painted yourself in a corner there lol
Well that just f###ing stupid. And to be technical TDs in losses count towards tie breakers in the final standings. Turnovers don't. WRONG AGAIN Rabbit.
Tell me how those turnovers in the Bills win matter to anyone but you.
NFL teams review the game film on Mondays and then move onto the next gameplan.
Why should anyone be concerned with these turnovers?
-
1 minute ago, Mikie2times said:
The 49ers have multiple turnovers in scoring position and it had no impact on the game. Got it. Holy crap.
No one ever said that in reference to the 49ers game.
-
6 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Those turnovers DID matter lol.
To whom? 😄 Not to the team. The W is posted in the standings. They're on to New England.
Nick Wright will probably bring it up to make himself feel better about Mahomes this week. So there's that.
-
Just now, FireChans said:
You’re just wrong.
there’s no other way to describe it. There’s no statistical analysis that supports your position that turnovers EVER don’t matter.
Nothing.
I never said that turnovers don't EVER matter. There are definitely cases where they do matter and I gave an example where I believed they matrered. But there ARE several cases where they DON'T matter.
Can I find a case where they didn't matter?
Hmm, I have to go all the way back to um, Saturday night. This obscure team, the Buffalo Bills (ever hear of them) lost the turnover battle 0-3 to the Chargers, but WON the game.
So I guess that turnovers don't matter in EVERY case. Right?
So I guess you are WRONG that turnovers matter in EVERY CASE.
4 minutes ago, TBBills Fan said:So you are saying the turnover battle is one of the most important metrics that determines winning and losing?
You don't say?
It depends. 😉
-
Just now, FireChans said:
IN EVERY CASE ITS NOT.
NO IT'S NOT.
-
Just now, FireChans said:
I think that the QB throwing 4 picks is a huge reason they are about to get blown out.
crazy concept.
In this case, it's not.
-
4 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:
.... but only if Purdy doesn't score a TD and put them ahead. If Purdy throws a TD and walks off and the Raven's score again and win none of Purdy's turnovers count.
Now you're getting it! 😄
3 minutes ago, FireChans said:Probably, yeah.
Yeah, I think the Ravens are the better team.
Hope they do the same thing to Miami next week.
-
Just now, FireChans said:
No, what I’m saying is, by definition, those TO’s have ALREADY affected the outcome.
So the Ravens are winning this game?
-
23 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:
What in god's name are you talking about? It isn't a what if scenario if it actually happened. The Viking's game we turned the ball over and lost. The NE playoff game we didn't turn the ball over and we killed them. There's no "what if" scenario. Bronco's game, Jet's game, even the Eagles we turned the ball over and gave up easy scores and lost. You can argue the weight of the turnovers but you can't argue the fact that we turned the ball over and we lost. Like someone else said show me a game with no turnovers and I'll show you a win 94 percent of the time.
Pretty simple. The Bills turned the ball over on the goalline. The Vikings scored. The Bills lost. That turnover was a key factor in the loss.
The Patriots turned the ball over twice. But the Bills so throughly outplayed the Patriots that the turnovers were not a determining factor in the game. The Bills didn't need the turnovers to win. Things like the Bills pass completion percentage and third down efficiency played a bigger role in determining the outcome of that game.
-
11 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Okay.
You know, I happen to think lots of things that happen in games affect the outcome. If the Niners lose, Purdy’s 3 INT’s will be a big reason why. No matter what else happens.
I disagree. Josh’s passing TD numbers are not huge statistical aberrations. His rushing TD’s are, and he ain’t throwing picks when he runs.
For his career, Allen has 100 more passing TDs than ints. So he's pretty damn good throwing the ball too.
if you want to analyze the 49ers game when it ends, and determine those turnovers are the reason for a loss, awesome. I got no problem analyzing specific game stats to determine what impacted the outcome.
If you want to throw out an aggregated stat, like, say, 94% of teams who don't turn the ball over win, well I probably want to continue the conversation to learn if that stat proved true in this specific game.
-
Just now, oldmanfan said:
Maybe. Or maybe throw away a game like the season opener against the Jets.
Favre won one. And I recall him losing playoff games by critical mistakes. I don’t want Josh to be that.
I am astounded by the number of fans who have so little faith in Josh that they don’t think he can play smarter.
Well Allen walked off the field in OT with that game tied. The Bills lost that game on a punt returned of a TD.
You accuse of others of believing Josh is dumb, but nobody I know is saying that.
Allen is an incredibly intelligent player. He has something like 125+ more career total TDs than interceptions. You don't post numbers like that if you're not intelligent.
Do you believe Allen is playing dumb? Every player makes mistakes, Allen's no different, but he's pretty damn good at making up for those mistakes. The guy is the biggest reset button in the league.
Seems like the only resolution that most want on this thread is to have Allen never throw another interception again. I mean, he scored three TDs against the Chargers, but because the game was close and Allen threw a pick, everybody wants to obsess on that.
If you don't think Allen plays smartly, maybe you should take a look at the throws he makes rather than the ones he misses. He's a pretty spectacular QB.
-
15 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Show me any data that sacks, penalties etc are as correlated to wins/losses as TO’s.
I won't, because I believe all these stats are not entirely causal. You can't look at these stats in aggregate and then say, see, that's why the Bills lost a specific game.
That's why I point to specific games to determine if turnovers are, in fact, the Achilles heel of this team. I don't think they are. Do i like it when they happen, of course not. But i believe the majority of their losses can be attributed to other factors than turnovers.
-
2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:
You want Favre. I want Montana or Brady. I think Allen can combine both. Too bad you and others apparently don’t think he can play smarter football. Guess you think he must be too dumb?
Well you're not getting Montana or Brady. Those guys were rhythm passers. Dorsey tried to turn Allen into a rhythm passer. It didn't work.
Favre won a Super Bowl, right? I think if Allen had Holmgrem (in his prime) as his coach, he'd be better than Favre.
But I want Josh Allen, with no comparisons to any other QB. And in no way did I imply he was dumb. Allen is supremely confident in has abilities and can make every throw on the field imaginable. He has made throws that no other QB in NFL history has made. He succeeds in breaking rules.
That's the guy I want. Because I know if he screws up and throws an int, he's going to come back with three TDs passing and throwing.
-
15 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:
The irony of you saying this is immeasurable.
The outcome of the Miinnesota game last season was determined by turnovers. The NE playoff game wasn't determined by turnovers.
Catching on yet, Alternative game theory? Or do we need another 'what if' scenario to make you feel more comfortable?
-
3 minutes ago, FireChans said:
See, I don’t care if folks say, “hey Josh is gonna turn it over, it sucks but it is what it is.”
But folks say silly things like “turnovers don’t matter” or “turnovers don’t correlate with losses.”
Its comical.
There was once a contingent of posters who debated that you didn’t need a franchise QB to win football games. They are gone now.
What's comical is ignoring every other thing besides turnovers that determines the outcome of a game.
Like TDs, sacks, penalties, rushing yards, passing yards, FG bombs, game management, gameplans, and the rest don't matter.
Look turnovers can be a key factor in determining the outcome of the game. But to believe that it is key determining factor in 80% games is ridiculous.
Believing that causes you to do stupid things like shackle your franchise QB because you're afraid if he throws an int it will cause you to lose the game. And when you do that, your lose your OC job in the middle of the season, because instead of cutting down ints, you constipated a top 5 offensive unit.
Nobody likes turnovers, but good teams don't turn into bet wetters when they occur.
Back to the thread topic, the actual game evidence doesn't suggest that turnovers are the Achilles heel of this team. As fans, would we like the team to play perfectly and win every game going away? Sure, but this is the NFL, and the league is messy. And regardless of turnovers this year, the Bills had the chance to win 4 additional games this season with defensive stands. To me, that suggests the Bills Achilles heel this season is 4th quarter defense.
-
7 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Josh didn’t score more points than his opponent in our losses.
When he walked off the field for the last time in 12 of 15 of the games this season, the Bills had the lead. In 13 of those 15 games, the Bills led or the game was tied.
Whatever happened after he walked off the field for the last time in those games is on the defense or special teams. The Bills lost 4 of those games.
Get the gist Rabbit?
-
Just now, Mikie2times said:
The line by Vegas would indicate that these are in fact singular outcomes that have lots of factors involved. That any one game can be played multiple times with multiple results but it seems like somehow you look at these games as if they're were always going to go one way no matter what. Almost like you don't believe in an alternative game script. Perhaps like if we didn't commit all those turnovers to Denver we would have never needed to be in a position to have a game winning drive from Josh. You had literally dozens of games to hand pick to fit whatever argument you want and you hilariously picked games in which turnovers actually did play a huge role.
Come back to reality. The Vegas line is used by casinos to balance odds and minimize their exposure. It is not a predictive tool.
Your use of "if we" shows the cause vs correlation argument you refuse to acknowledge in the turnover stats.
The Broncos game is plainly fact -based When the Broncos miss that field goal, the Bills had the game won, despite all the turnovers, sacks, and penalties that happened before, the Bills won. None of that other stuff mattered. When the flag came out, and the re-kick went thru, the reason for the loss was 12 men on the field. You can "what if" all those other things, but the Bills put the right number of players on the field. Game over. No need for nonsense like alternative game script.
You overrate turnovers. Turnovers had nothing to do with the Bills playoff win against NE. They win with or without those turnovers. Allen throwing no interceptions against the Colts doesn't prevent Taylor from steamrolling the Bills defense. Allen's first quarter interception played no role in the defenses inability to stop Mac Jones on the last drive against Mac Jones. And Allen's interceptions against Denver had nothing to do with the 12 man penalty that turned a W into a L.
I'm responding to the turnover numbers you posted by saying that those numbers can further be categorized by causation and corellation. Sometimes a turnover is the reason for a game's result, and sometimes it's does not determine the outcome, and is just another stat. This is true of ever statistic outside of final score.
You respond with 'what if' and alternative game script nonsense. I don't think this is subjective. I think it's pretty easy to see when a turnover directly impacts a game and when it doesn't.
-
11 minutes ago, Rockinon said:
Josh doesn't need to be coached on plays like that. He simply needs to look at the tape and can see for himself that the throw running to his right, throwing deep to his left is simply a bad choice. He is clearly over aggressive at times and he knows this by now. You can see it on his face immediately after the play. He has repeatedly also made plays like that work, but throwing across his body like that is clearly a bad decision. He's just got to make mental notes of things like that and try not to do it again. It's not a coaching thing. There are plenty of times his gunslinger attitude works out, but he does need to be better at simply managing a game and learning to save the fight for right moments. That just wasn't the right time. He is going through some growing pains this year. I think he is going to continue to be a great QB and grow into an even better one. He does play like he is unnecessarily impatient at times. I think he is learning this the hard way, but he'll come around.
I don't think Allen will ever play the way you want him to. He has made dozens of completions more risky than that and will make dozens more.
It's not that he's hard-headed or dumb, it's that he knows he has the arm to make throws like that and he's going to continue to try.
It's who he is, and it's awesome to watch.
-
1 minute ago, Mikie2times said:
The Patriots were driving to tie the game at 7 when Hyde made one of the best INT's in Bills history. It swung the momentum like a tidal wave. In the Colts game it was 7-0 Colts, we throw a pick and now it's 14-0. We claw back 14-7, they kick a FG so now it's 17-7, we fumble and they score again making it 24-7.
Turnovers alter how the game is played and the outcome of the game had they not occured. Some games it doesn't matter that much. Like the Bengals game in which the turnover happened at the very end. But if you think we can keep showing up top 10 in turnovers each year and not have negative consequences as we are somehow absolved because we have Josh ( yet it has mattered for every HOF QB just the same and we are a .500 team when the TO differential is even or worse).
I'm not making this about Allen. Brady forced us into a conservative style against the Chargers and it partially shielded us so that can work when we can go that way. In the past fumbles have hurt us just as bad as INT's but Josh has really cleaned that up. It's turnovers as a whole. Whatever that recipe is to maximize success and limit turnovers is the right recipe. Your attitude is more aligned with Dorsey. Lets throw 50 times, who cares what the risk is.
Cmon, Hyde drops that interception and Allen doesn't throw 5 TDs? That ball was under thrown and wasn't going to be a TD, but say it ended up being a TD. The Bills in danger of losing that game because Jones managed a lucky throw to tie the score at 7? And against the Colts Allen doesn't throw the int, so the Bills defense DOESN'T get run over by Taylor?
Talk about fairy dust. Turnovers aren't magical. There are definitely games that are determine by turnovers, but there are just as many that are not.
There are six games I've mentioned where turnovers were not the key factor in the result (Denver, NE, Phi, NE playoff, Colts, Chargers). These are examples where turnovers happened but were not the reason for the game's result.
And my position is nothing like Dorsey's. I want the Bills to throw the ball as many times it takes to win the game. 5, 10, 15, 50 times, whatever it takes. When they throw the ball, however, I want Allen to do it without fear that the pass can result in an interception. I want Allen to rip it with out a coach's voice full of self doubt in his head. I want him to bolt the pocket if the yards are there. I want the ball in his hands when the game is on the line.
-
23 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:
The difference is exactly as you state: throwing back across the field into the center risks an interception because in general you are throwing back into more coverage, whereas throwing down the sideline does not to the same extent.
I have trouble understanding why some don’t think Josh can become an even better QB by thinking a bit more and by taking safer throws. There is no real argument against wanting a QB to turn the ball over less when the data on effect of turnovers on outcome of games is pretty clear.
Allen has thrown a bunch of TDs across his body. Big TDs too. Do you really want to coach that our of his game? I don't. There's risk, but it's greatly outweighed by the reward.
The data isn't clear. Turnovers are sometimes the cause of a win, but sometimes they are the result of other factors.
Consider the Buffalo/New England playoff game. The Bills won the turnover battle 2-0. Did they win that game because of the turnovers, or did they win because they kicked NE's ass all over the field, and the turnovers were a result of that ass kicking.
In 2021, the Bills lost to the Colts 41-15. They lost the turnover battle 0-2. Did they lose the game because of turnovers or because Jonathon Taylor ran for 185 yards and 4 TDs?
The Bills lost the turnover battle 1-0 in last year's playoff game against the Bengals. Is that turnover the reason they lost the game by 17 or were there other factors?
Turnovers can and do impact the game, but they are not the only determining factor for wins and loses. Often times they are the result of the way a team wins and not the reason for a win. Sometimes they are the cause, and sometimes they are the correlation.
-
1
-
1
-
Buffalo Bills’ key free agents
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
If Joseph doesn't retire, he will probably wait until the trading deadline before he signs with a team, like he's done the last two years.