TRUE or FALSE: Taylor Martinez will have a 60% or better completion rate this season.

At the risk of making an unrealistic and irrational prediction, I'd say 60% is obtainable.

I like that he's shooting for 70%, if he wasn't absurdly overconfident, I wouldn't want him at QB1.

 
Moiraine said:
RedDenver said:
OregonHuskerMan said:
It's hard to catch a ball when it rarely hits you in the numbers or is timed improperly. - FACT .
Click to expand...
:facepalm:

People really need to learn the difference between fact and opinion.
Click to expand...
Er, the thing you quoted IS a fact. Most of the rest of the stuff he said (that Martinez nearly always times it improperly or doesn't throw it on the numbers) was not.
Click to expand...
No. The statement "hard to catch" is subjective and cannot therefore be a fact.

 
Let's put it this way...

Throws that are often off-target or improperly timed have a lower completion rate than balls that are less often prone to such mistakes. I do not think that is disputable.

 
zoogies said:
Let's put it this way...

Throws that are often off-target or improperly timed have a lower completion rate than balls that are less often prone to such mistakes. I do not think that is disputable.
Click to expand...
This is a football message board. Everything is disputable. :lol:

 
zoogies said:
Let's put it this way...

Throws that are often off-target or improperly timed have a lower completion rate than balls that are less often prone to such mistakes. I do not think that is disputable.
Click to expand...
You still have to prove whether it's true or false. Without evidence, it's still debatable. But I think I've run off-topic for long enough.

I think Martinez will have a completion percentage of 60-65% this season.

 
RedDenver said:
zoogies said:
Let's put it this way...

Throws that are often off-target or improperly timed have a lower completion rate than balls that are less often prone to such mistakes. I do not think that is disputable.
Click to expand...
You still have to prove whether it's true or false. Without evidence, it's still debatable.
Click to expand...
Darn, we don't know if that one is true or false?

Silly 'every quarterback ever', striving to throw the ball accurately. If they only knew they might possibly have a better chance of completing it, by throwing it off-timing and off-target. :lol: I think we're onto a breakthrough here...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogies said:
RedDenver said:
zoogies said:
Let's put it this way...

Throws that are often off-target or improperly timed have a lower completion rate than balls that are less often prone to such mistakes. I do not think that is disputable.
Click to expand...
You still have to prove whether it's true or false. Without evidence, it's still debatable.
Click to expand...
Darn, we don't know if that one is true or false?

Silly 'every quarterback ever', striving to throw the ball accurately. If they only knew they might possibly have a better chance of completing it, by throwing it off-timing and off-target. :lol: I think we're onto a breakthrough here...
Click to expand...
Imagine if we went back and found that WR's caught more "off-target" throws than "on-target" throws. It'd be similar to the recent stats that show that going for it on 4th down is a more successful strategy than punting. Goes against the conventional wisdom.

P.S. I actually agree with your general point: some passes are easier to catch than others.

 
RedDenver said:
Imagine if we went back and found that WR's caught more "off-target" throws than "on-target" throws. It'd be similar to the recent stats that show that going for it on 4th down is a more successful strategy than punting. Goes against the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree that would be quite the revelation.

However, on the topic of 4th quarter "recent stats show", I don't buy into that at all. There is no context for these statistics. They ultimately attempt to answer a question of strategy as if it were one that could be answered definitively with fact. You can't really compare Expected Value EV(Punting) against EV(Going for it on 4th down)....because ultimately, what is the value? What kind of effect does it have on the game when you routinely give up field position? Let's say you go for it on four 4th downs per game. If you make all four it might be a coup, but what if missing three out of the four seriously lowers your chances for winning?

^ In the end, there are no simple ways to quantify something like this (and the same goes for two point conversions). All the "statistics" show are conversion rates on 2-pt conversions, or 4th down tries. It is then up to opinion and interpretation if a coach is willing to accept that risk or not.

 
TRUE. He will actually have a completion rate of 100% for the passes that are caught. That my friends, is an incredible feat.

 
zoogies said:
RedDenver said:
Imagine if we went back and found that WR's caught more "off-target" throws than "on-target" throws. It'd be similar to the recent stats that show that going for it on 4th down is a more successful strategy than punting. Goes against the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree that would be quite the revelation.

However, on the topic of 4th quarter "recent stats show", I don't buy into that at all. There is no context for these statistics. They ultimately attempt to answer a question of strategy as if it were one that could be answered definitively with fact. You can't really compare Expected Value EV(Punting) against EV(Going for it on 4th down)....because ultimately, what is the value? What kind of effect does it have on the game when you routinely give up field position? Let's say you go for it on four 4th downs per game. If you make all four it might be a coup, but what if missing three out of the four seriously lowers your chances for winning?

^ In the end, there are no simple ways to quantify something like this (and the same goes for two point conversions). All the "statistics" show are conversion rates on 2-pt conversions, or 4th down tries. It is then up to opinion and interpretation if a coach is willing to accept that risk or not.
Click to expand...
I completely agree. I was just using it as a recent topic that runs counter to conventional wisdom. Statistics are generally used to attempt to give simplified answers to scenarios based on conflicting or insufficient data. If there was a single answer, then statistics probably weren't necessary.

 
RedDenver said:
Moiraine said:
RedDenver said:
OregonHuskerMan said:
It's hard to catch a ball when it rarely hits you in the numbers or is timed improperly. - FACT .
Click to expand...
:facepalm:

People really need to learn the difference between fact and opinion.
Click to expand...
Er, the thing you quoted IS a fact. Most of the rest of the stuff he said (that Martinez nearly always times it improperly or doesn't throw it on the numbers) was not.
Click to expand...
No. The statement "hard to catch" is subjective and cannot therefore be a fact.
Click to expand...
Alright, you've got me. But he clearly meant "harder" to catch and that's fact. It requires more of the body's energy when you have to move your arms further from the body, and the hand-eye coordination requirement is higher.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top