OCinBuffalo Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 This is a typically flawed attack. What? Was I supposed to come up with an atypical attack? KC doesn't do his math properly, doesn't collect his data objectively and therefore draws conclusions that never accurately predict results on the field. Is there an atypical way to say that? Get back to me when you have that. Look at one particular conclusion that an analysis throws up and say that because of that one conclusion, obviously everything else is wrong. No. Using one case to demonstrate a point is called: AN EXAMPLE. As I said we have already found many other instances of KC's crap-throwing monkey math. I could have easily used those as an EXAMPLE. Which EXAMPLE do you want me to use next time? I sense that's where this is going...if I decide to start really caring enough to prove you wrong. Buddy you don't want to be on the losing end of another "3.5" debate. Joyner's numbers are thoughtful and interesting. HHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, but only if you are an anthropologist... ....studying how the ignorant try to use tools whose purpose and function they don't understand. It's like watching an primitive person holding an M16 and yelling "bang". The way to attack it would be to provide a link to what he says rather than just provide your biased paraphrase. Then to show other stats or facts which would tend to disprove the thesis, not just one particular small conclusion out of the hundreds or thousands produced by the method. No. Reverse that whole thing and now we have the way for KC to PROVE his data collection, method, and thesis...in the first place! Which he patently has not. Show me where I can find his method reproduced effectively anywhere and then I can get to work disproving it. It appears you've got things backwards. KC has yet to provide the very thing you say I need: "the hundreds or thousands of conclusions???" I'll settle for consistent, comparable, raw data, which he still can't get right. Before we talk about conclusions, or methods, I presume you know that making sure your data isn't skewed is job #1, right??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 What? Was I supposed to come up with an atypical attack? KC doesn't do his math properly, doesn't collect his data objectively and therefore draws conclusions that never accurately predict results on the field. Is there an atypical way to say that? Get back to me when you have that. No. Using one case to demonstrate a point is called: AN EXAMPLE. As I said we have already found many other instances of KC's crap-throwing monkey math. I could have easily used those as an EXAMPLE. Which EXAMPLE do you want me to use next time? I sense that's where this is going...if I decide to start really caring enough to prove you wrong. Buddy you don't want to be on the losing end of another "3.5" debate. HHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, but only if you are an anthropologist... ....studying how the ignorant try to use tools whose purpose and function they don't understand. It's like watching an primitive person holding an M16 and yelling "bang". No. Reverse that whole thing and now we have the way for KC to PROVE his data collection, method, and thesis...in the first place! Which he patently has not. Show me where I can find his method reproduced effectively anywhere and then I can get to work disproving it. It appears you've got things backwards. KC has yet to provide the very thing you say I need: "the hundreds or thousands of conclusions???" I'll settle for consistent, comparable, raw data, which he still can't get right. Before we talk about conclusions, or methods, I presume you know that making sure your data isn't skewed is job #1, right??? Same old same old. Insults without providing any data. Nothing but weasel words. Not one single example of a Joyner mistake. Thanks for proving my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Has anyone said "F*#K Jason Peters!" yet today? Then let me be the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Who's Peters? Oh yeah, he's an Eagle now. So you're vowing not to ever mention Jack Kemp, Thurman Thomas, etc.? They aren't Bills anymore either. Let's face it, this is just a justification for a guy who has closed his mind about Peters and wants to hide his head in the sand. Yeah, he's an Eagle. We're talking about his Bills career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Peters cost us the Jets game. If we are talking about the same Jets game, Jauron/Turk were responsible for the loss, IMO. I'm not even certain the guy who hit JP was Peters' responsibility on that play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Remember statistics are for losers. get over this. "Statistics are for losers" is for losers. Do you think scouts take a look at scouts when they scout? Does every single team in the NFL study the stats on their opponent down to the tiniest little detail. Yup. Wonder why that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Unfortunately for you, that is not case here. Sorry to disappoint, but my views on this represent the very "variance" away from what you say is invariably meant. And, look buddy there are pages and pages devoted to this already. Do we really have to dig up the entire thing? I frankly don't remember what the original point was 2 years ago, when KC first embarked on his "fun with statistics" amateur kit. Then as now, I stopped caring the second I realized that the methods used to derive his supposed stats were based on sub-standard math. I do remember that I didn't care what conclusions he was trying to draw, or what it might have meant +/- for the Bills, after I realized that a monkey throwing crap at a bingo board was a more reliable source of raw data. Christ where are DC Tom and Ramius when you need them? They have written 100s of pages on statistical methodology here ad nauseum, but the one time you need them to provide a link for my lazy ass, they are nowhere to be found. All that 3.5 stuff for nothing. Also, I might have time later today to dig this up and also provide a formal critique(read: shred KC's ass once again) of the new stuff. Gosh, I'm overwhelmed by all the evidence in your post. Oh, wait, there is none. That shouldn't surprise me, there hasn't been one in any of your posts in this thread. I don't know you, maybe you have some points. But you haven't even begun to make one in this thread beyond the point that you don't like Joyner. I'll try to remember to look for your post later if you do actually critique him. But try to remember that a (thoughtful, logical) critique would include a link to the stuff that you're critiquing, so that we can see how his argument stacks up to yours and vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 If we are talking about the same Jets game, Jauron/Turk were responsible for the loss, IMO. I'm not even certain the guy who hit JP was Peters' responsibility on that play. No doubt it was Jauron/Schonert who blew the game with that horrible play call, but what was FatBoy's responsibility on the play, then? 'Cause he basically didn't move or touch anyone - in fact, he barley got out of his crouch as Elam blew by him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartshan-83 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 If we are talking about the same Jets game, Jauron/Turk were responsible for the loss, IMO. I'm not even certain the guy who hit JP was Peters' responsibility on that play. I agree with both you and Senator about the playcall, but there is no way this is anyone else's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 No doubt it was Jauron/Schonert who blew the game with that horrible play call, but what was FatBoy's responsibility on the play, then? 'Cause he basically didn't move or touch anyone - in fact, he barley got out of his crouch as Elam blew by him. Dunno what his responsibility was, Sen...that's the point. The play was such a total clusterfu#k, it's hard to know exactly what was supposed to happen. It MIGHT have been Peters' responsibility, but I can't be sure, and I don't assign blame to players simply because I don't like them...at least not usually Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 So you're vowing not to ever mention Jack Kemp, Thurman Thomas, etc.? They aren't Bills anymore either. Let's face it, this is just a justification for a guy who has closed his mind about Peters and wants to hide his head in the sand. Yeah, he's an Eagle. We're talking about his Bills career. Er, um, Kemp retired a Buffalo Bill. Thurman, save for a brief one-year stint in Miami - which was basically forced upon him when the Bills released him to get out of Butler's salary cap hell - also retired a Buffalo Bill. Both of those guys bleed Bills Blue. Peters was a slacker and a malcontent who quit on his team, and on his team mates. Don't even try to compare that fat POS to a HOF RB or the guy who QB'd the Bills to their only league championships. F*#K Jason Peters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 No doubt it was Jauron/Schonert who blew the game with that horrible play call, but what was FatBoy's responsibility on the play, then? 'Cause he basically didn't move or touch anyone - in fact, he barley got out of his crouch as Elam blew by him. I agree with both you and Senator about the playcall, but there is no way this is anyone else's fault. None of us knows the line call, on that play. But, if you watch the play again, carefully and slowly, you will see the Jets stunted right before the snap. Elam looks to be dropping into coverage, just before the snap, and Peter's initial responsibility may have been another player. I'm not suggesting that Peters made a good recovery, if that was the case, not at all. But I also don't know what else went awry on that play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 I'm not sure if I ever saw this talked about, and if it has been then I apologize. First off, the numbers KC Joyner provided shows that when it comes to run blocking, even with his 11.5 sacks in 13 games, Peters is a beast. Second, I was wondering if a bulk of Peters sacks came when J.P. took over while Trent was out. Losman was prone to a lot of sacks for his constant scrambling, and I was wondering if Peters' inflated sack totals might have been due to Losman. Just throwing it out there because I was curious. Please don't kill me Hate to break this to your, but Edwards takes just as many bad sacks as Losman as he holds onto the ball way too long...he also fumbles quite a bit like Losman. Losman runs all over the field to get sacked, Edwards just stands there forever and doesnt throw the ball away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 PS: Who cares, he is an Eagle now...why are we even still talking about Peters? Lets talk about say Matt Hasselbeck, I mean he now has about as much relevance to our team as Peters as he is no longer a Bill and isnt even in the AFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 None of us knows the line call, on that play. But, if you watch the play again, carefully and slowly, you will see the Jets stunted right before the snap. Elam looks to be dropping into coverage, just before the snap, and Peter's initial responsibility may have been another player. I'm not suggesting that Peters made a good recovery, if that was the case, not at all. But I also don't know what else went awry on that play. A good recovery???!!! He didn't even try to make a recovery. Look how long it takes before you see the fat load reappear in the video - FatBoy completely gave up on the play - didn't even hustle to try and get involved after the fumble. He just stood there watching. The Eagles can have the overpaid POS. Good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 I had predicted that when Peters is playing well for the Eagles, the Peters haters would say why are we talking about Peters or words to that effect. I did not anticipate that they would use that line so soon though. The fact of the matter is that this trade (good or bad) will impact the team for a long time. OJ begat Cousineau who begat Kelly who helped begat four straight Superbowl appearances. As Bills fans, to this day, we spend plenty of time talking/posting about former Bills. We are still debating RJ/Flutie just to mention one topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 No. You are not allowed to use statistics to waste our time telling us things we already know: Dome/Good weather QBs tend to have better passing stats...because they play in good weather. Who could have imagined that? Yes, we needed statistical analysis to tell us the obvious...thanks KC! Thanks billybob and Big Bad Boone! Let me know when you guys and KC complete your analysis of "QBs that are under 6'2" and their difficulty seeing over the line", or, "reasons why LBs can't cover Lee Evans", or, "Qbs that kneel with the ball and winning: a surprising connection, QBs that kneel the most are most likely to win!", or, "correlation between idiot posts at TSW and poor understanding of statistics". KC's other retarded habit: ignoring the obvious conclusion and replacing it with the nonsense conclusion, "based on the data". I.E. KC's conclusion in 2006: Tavaris Jackson and John Kitna are more accurate...and therefore better...than a lot of QBs in the league...because KC's "stats" say so. I think it's clear by now that this is not the case, and that the obvious conclusion, borne out by the 2007 and 2008 seasons, is that they both suck and their passing accuracy was misleading because it was padded by dome conditions. But yeah, go ahead and interpret what I am saying as: "duh, OC says we can't use stats cause dey have to be perfect", instead of what I am saying: statistical modeling is best left to those of us who know what they are doing. Relax there, champ. My post consisted mostly of questions, and upon a re-read, I don't see any of them as particularly stupid. But thanks for the snarky response, and the eye-rolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 A good recovery???!!! He didn't even try to make a recovery. Look how long it takes before you see the fat load reappear in the video - FatBoy completely gave up on the play - didn't even hustle to try and get involved after the fumble. He just stood there watching. I can't disagree with much of that. But, for all we know, a back may have had responsibility for the blitzing Elam, on that play. As I said, it definately wasn't a good play by Peters, but we can't say for certain that the sack belongs to him, as we don't know the responsibilities on that play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Fan 4 LIFE Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Peters cost us the Jets game. Acutally, I felt that J.P. and Jauron cost us that game. J.P. for trying to forward pass whilst being mauled and having no receivers around him and Jauron for not knowing J.P. would do exactly that when he called the bootleg. Not sure how Peters had anything to do with J.P. not just going down, taking the sack, letting the clock run, and winning the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Remember statistics are for losers. get over this. Says people who understand neither statistics nor appropriate statistical method. KC's methods are interesting and good for a debate, but he attempts to apply rigorous statistical analysis to a sport in which there are too many external variables. Under intense scrutiny, KC's methods would most likely fall apart. Baseball is a sport that you can have rigorous analysis due to the relative simplicity of the game and the fact you have an extremely large sample size for your analysis (162 games, 500-600 at bats, etc). Someone mentioned home runs. Lets compare those to pass completions. When analyzing home runs, you have a relatively simple analysis. It is pitcher versus batter. No other external factors come into play. (i'm leaving out mental factors). A person's home run hitting ability isn't going to be affected by runners on base, nor by any outfield shift, nor by how big of a leadoff the runner takes, nor by the amount of pick-off throws the pitcher makes. The home run comes down to the batter being able to hit the pitched ball. Compare that to the pass completion. A multitude of variables affect a completed pass. What type of coverage is the defense is? How many people are in coverage? How long is the pass? Did any of the blockers miss an assignment? Did a WR run the wrong route. Did a WR get jammed? Was the QB hurried? This is why it is extremely difficult to make a rigorous statistical analysis with football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts