syhuang

Stop bringing up some technical terms like t-distribution until you really know what it is. IN your method, you take the summations of JP's number last year and this year. You are comparing summations, the t-distribution of the same player is useless when comparing summations. What are other quarterbacks' numbers you used to set the standard?

You still can not show why 7% or 15% is not "statistically significant" in your method. In some cases, 1% is statistically significant. In other cases, 20% is statistically significant. Again, you haven't defined "noise" here. The noise range is different in different studies. Some cases have higher noise range, some have lower. In this the third time to remind you, you never define "big enough" or "significantly better" by providing other qb's stats. Your method shows very inconsistent result when using 10 yards, 15 yards, or 20 yards as threshold.

Define "Big enough". Have you showed any historical data to define "big enough"? What is regarded as "big enough" for using 15 yards as threshold? how about 20 yards? You must be mistaken, you're discussing JP's improvement with other people here. All I said was to point out you manipulate numbers by making up your own rules so the converted numbers can support your argument. Don't bring other stuff in to shift the focus, I'm only talking about your "converted points per game" numbers from your own rules. Admit your rules have at least one major flaw and the results are not consistent by using different thresholds.

You have to set a threshold, but it can not favor one side. The converted numbers tell a totally different story when using 10 yards and 15 yards as threshold. So can we conclude the numbers you showed are not that meaningful on evaluating JP's progression?

Wow, you just make up your own rules so the "converted" numbers can support you argument. Why do you discount the scoring drives when Losman contributed less than 10 yards? why not 15 yards or 20 yards? Why don't you give him partial credits instead? I know one of the main reasons. It is because there're three scoring drives during his second stint last seaon, he only contribued 11 yards, 12 yards, and 17 yards. If you use 15 yards or 20 yards as threshold, you can not make his last season's number better. On the other hand, in 2006, Losman only has one scoring drive he contributes between 10 and 20 yards. If you use 15 yards, the numbers will become 2005(second stint): 9.4 2006: 10.1 If you use 20 yards, the numbers will be 2005(second stint): 8.6 2006: 10.1 Oh, no, now the numbers are not good to badmouth JP anymore. You basically manipulate the numbers by creating your own rules. You just set the threshold so the results can support your argument.

You clearly have difficulty to comprehend. Is it so hard to notice "since he was injured last season."? So by your standard, if a player got injured first and then played many games, he is a bust. But if a player played many games and then got injured, he is not. And don't play dumb and ask me how I can be so sure that Bowen or Jennings will play many games later. I don't need to be, because I never label them as busts. For the people who already label them busts, just explain that Bowen and Jennings definitely won't play many games in the future.

What big difference? Check how many games Jennings missed before and after he signed with 49ers and come again. Jennings played at least 11 games per season in Bills uniform (14 games in his last year) and only played 3 games last season for 49ers. In the mean time, try to relate bust to number of games missed due to injury.

By bringing up Johas Jennings (and implying his injury history) to attack LABillzFan's statement.

So by your logic, Takeo Spikes would be considered a "bust" since he was injured last season.

Right, you didn't show any stats. QB ratings are calculated by your observations. ALERT....ALERT....SKY IS FALLING...... ALERT....ALERT....SKY IS FALLING......

ALERT....ALERT....SKY IS FALLING...... Some one who only trusted observations and was so afraid of stats is actually showing stats. His next step is to learn to distinguish a offensive lineman and a rushing direction. ALERT....ALERT....SKY IS FALLING......

After further review and taking bye weeks into consideration, Bills offense only ranked 20th in average yards and ranked 21th in average passing yards on the games Holcomb started last season. It's ok to promote Holcomb, but try to show correct stats next time.

These numbers are meaningless. You need to take bye weeks into consideration. During the 8 games Holcomb started last season, there're many teams having their bye weeks. You can not compare the accumulated stats of 8 games to other teams which only played 7 games.

Rotoworld reports it's a second round draft pick.

I never disagree Lions' chance of going 11-5 is possible but close to improbable. I just point out his monkey example is not a good one. The possibilities of winning one lottery and winning 995227 consecutive lotteries are low. But in math, these two are not even comparable, winning one lottery is much possible comparing to winning 995227 consecutive lotteries.

I know you try to show how impossible Lions going 11-5 is, but your monkey case is really not a good example. If Lions' chance to win one game is p (0<p<1), the chance of Lions going 11-5 is p^11*(1-p)^5. Let's say p is only 30%, the possibility of Lions going 11-5 is about 0.0000298%. If p is 20%, the possibility of 11-5 is about 0.000000671%. Of course, the chance of winning each game is different. However, the possibility of Lions winning 11 games is in the range of above numbers and is higher than winning one lottery. It is much much much higher than a monkey randomly type the whole Shakespeare work. There're total 884647 words in Shakespeare and average 4.5 characters per word. Therefore, the possibility of randomly typing the whole Shakespeare works is (10^-7961823), it's 7961823 zeros after decimal point. How low is it? It's about winning 995227 consecutive lotteries.

Randy Moss' base salary in next two seasons: 2007: 9.75 million 2008: 11.25 millon

and Roy Williams is a MIA and hasn't practiced this week. He also has a neck injury. http://highlightreel.blogs.mlive.com/default.asp?item=221004 Q: What is up with Roy Williams? A: He's been taking care of personal issues. They don't know where he is. They've talked to him, and he says he'll play. Until they actually see him, they won't know for sure. He says he will play.

I don't think NFL ever has a 0-16 team. The closest one is Tampa Bay's 0-14 in 1976 (part of their 26-game losing streak).

Many of the ESPN readers don't agree with their experts though. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation...g?event_id=2497

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/features/talent 7 out of 8 ESPN "experts" pick Lions to get their first win this wee In a related news, ESPN still insists all Bills draft picks are reaches and Levy is too old to be a GM.

What a conclusion!!

Shouldn't it be Mike Gandy instead of Tutan Reyes who ranks number 1 overall in left tackle by VABills interpretation?

Again, you misunderstand the number and can't admit your mistake. The stat you refer to is not comparing individual lineman, it's comparing the whole O-line. Do you think only Shelton is blocking opposite players when Brown rushes 'left tackle' direction and other linemans just sit and watch? Shelton may be more important when Brown rushes 'left tackle' direction, but it's NOT an evluation on his overall rush block ability, let's alone the overall left tackle position ability. And you must realize there're other directions the RB rushes!? The stats show Miami offensive line does well on one of the directions their RB rushes, not even the overall run block. Where does your top10LT come from? Admit your mistake first, in your original post you said "Look halfway down, where they show the left tackle "stats" and then the average. They have Shelton with a 4.80 and ranked 9th in the league. the average LT is 4.28, what ever that means", you clearly mistake "left tackle" as a player instead of a direction. But you are just too pride to face your own mistake.