Mikie2times

The 49ers have multiple turnovers in scoring position and it had no impact on the game. Got it. Holy crap.

Its Shtick

It is now blasphemy to say Mahomes is better, have fun with this.

Waddle runs a mallard rescue in the offseason

So, looks like we might see a flat Ravens squad take on Miami

Causation / Correlation, as you have tried to use about 8 times would mean that in the process of winning, one of those outcomes would be more likely to increase or decrease which would limit our ability to view that data independently. As an example, TD's or rushing attempts. But when it comes to turnovers, it is completely independent of points. It is also not influenced by points such as the case with rushing attempts. It is largely independent which is why it is viewed as the holy grail by anybody with an understanding of the game. As I said earlier, the Bills are 29-26 when they're even or worse in the turnover battle. They're 31-2 when they have a +1 or better. So again, it would REALLY seem to matter to this team how they fair in the turnover battle. Other things do matter, yes, nobody said this was the only thing that mattered. But it's probably the most correlated data point to winning % in the NFL.

Christmas is ruined

We seem to have the fishes number but Cleveland or Baltimore will put us in a Broncos, Chargers, Jets style game. More confident against Baltimore just based on historic success against Lamar despite knowing he is in a new system. We do well against mobile QB's. It's sort of funny, top down, I really don't fear anybody but all of them will put us in a FG game it would seem.

Really not a fan. I get frustrated at Josh sometimes for being off schedule. Lamar doesn't have a schedule.

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.

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.

It's like being stuck in the snow. In the past we would just gas it and try and get out but it only got worse. This time we methodically worked our way out and it wasn't pretty or exciting but it worked. Historically these are the games we throw 50 times, Josh tacks on a few more INT's and we lose. See Jets game. I thought the conservative play calling was just what we needed.

Keep believing in your fairy dust

Not really mind bending. The Bills are 29-26 when the turnover battle is even or negative and 31-2 when it's positive since 2019.

What do you think our record is with Josh when we lose the turnover battle?

Teams have nearly an 80% win rate when winning the turnover battle but somehow you feel like 1) we are immune to it and 2) you can somehow quantify injuries and coaching to have more impact than something that has been proven to be overwhelming statistically

We are tied for 8th in the NFL in giveaways. We tied for 3rd worst last year. The NFL is still largely about turnover differential. Just because our QB often makes up for it in heroic fashion or other teams are also playing sloppy doesn't change the importance of protecting the ball. Brady seems to be aware especially in these close games that removing passing attempts removes turnover probability. That attitude would have won us the Jets game. Yup, just like the Jets opener.

If he got his moms digits he would be legend

This is how I see it. Orange, I would take over Gabe. Green, is basically two #1's. Red, these teams just don't have legitimate WR cores and they're bad teams. We could say, sure, see, Gabe is better than these, but being better than the worst isn't how we become better. Gabe has an average depth of target and catch% as a result of his ADOT that is among the worst in football. It makes him a one trick pony. If we had the other ingredients like a big body possession WR with a very low ADOT perhaps his profile would balance it out. But we don't have that. Keeping Gabe has prevented us from developing a WR core that is more diverse. It's a big part of what leads to our inconsistency. Perhaps another team will pay for Gabe's skill set. That shouldn't be our concern, he is unquestionably holding us back by being slotted in as a starter which has prevented us from upgrading.

I think the Super Bowl hype is a joke TBH. But then again, so is the entire AFC. Who should we be scared of? Who can't we play with? I'm not saying that because I think we are good, I'm saying that because the competition is horrible.

All you’re measuring is production. He has the deepest average depth of target in the NFL. Which is because he can only run half the route tree. Which means he can only assist our offense in routes past 15 yards. Which makes our offense extremely inconsistent. This isn’t baseball. You can’t just look at a players stat line and not evaluate it as far as how it impacts the rest of the team.

Ughh, no dude. Just because his production rate is above league average for a #2 doesn’t mean he can run an in route. His ability to impact a game is measured more by his ability to threaten a defense which he can only do over the top and no, I don’t want my #2 WR to only be a vertical threat. Your analysis doesn’t factor in multiple things that are relevant.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/player/_/stat/receiving/table/receiving/sort/receivingYards/dir/desc This is just total receiving yards on the year and I would be hard pressed to find anybody on that list I'm not taking over Gabe. It's about route running. We can't afford to have our #2 option only running routes downfield. Hell, Shakir is debatable as far as who you take. At least Shakir can run the full tree. Davis is a niche player for us which is why he can just be taken out of games. No thanks.

Its a pendulum in my opinion. As the forces get more difficult your ability to overcome things gets more difficult. We could do so against the Chargers. It won't likely happen in the playoffs. Unless our ability to manage and prepare has somehow changed or improved. Which perhaps it has. Who knows.