Know the Foe: Brett Smith

[knapplc]

I'm just trying to see if context matters at all. Yes or no?

[beanman]

Who the f#*k is Brett Smith?

[zoogs]

Well, context matters, but it goes both ways. Yeah, he didn't play against great defenses. But he also plays for Wyoming. Should a player who puts up good numbers on a championship team get discounted for being a part of such a good team? Should a player who puts up good numbers on a poor team get discounted for the lower level of competition?

 

I don't think so, for either. It's possible that those are the only reasons he put up good numbers, but it's also possible he's a good player anyway. Again, it's a case of not being able to draw strong conclusions. It's maddening, yes, but numbers - even ones we work quite hard to compile - sometimes just aren't as definitive as we'd like.

[The Virginian]

Casper Star Tribune on Wyoming defensive line preparations. They know they'll have their hands full. Wyoming Defense

[Landlord]

I'm with zoogies in the sense of I don't think you can say with confidence one way or the other how good he is.

 

 

Sure he goes up against worse defenses, but to counter he's also surrounded by worse skill players and protected by worse linemen.

[Mavric]

Casper Star Tribune on Wyoming defensive line preparations. They know they'll have their hands full. Wyoming Defense

OPPOSITE ENDS: While Nebraska finished eighth in the country in rushing yards-per-game in 2012, the Wyoming defense allowed 232.3 rush yards, one of the worst marks in the country.

Now, consider that the Wyoming defensive line enters this season having lost its premier interior contributors, Mike Purcell and Kurt Taufa'asau. And even with those two, the Cowboys allowed a putrid 232.3 rush yards per game in 2012, one of the worst marks in the country.

[knapplc]

We've made important progress today, then. We've discovered that stats are worthless in the face of opinion. Coaches, statisticians, analysts - all may be ignored with impunity because I / we have a different opinion.

 

Nate Silver's gonna be so ticked!

[caveman99]

Well, context matters, but it goes both ways. Yeah, he didn't play against great defenses. But he also plays for Wyoming. Should a player who puts up good numbers on a championship team get discounted for being a part of such a good team? Should a player who puts up good numbers on a poor team get discounted for the lower level of competition?

 

I don't think so, for either. It's possible that those are the only reasons he put up good numbers, but it's also possible he's a good player anyway. Again, it's a case of not being able to draw strong conclusions. It's maddening, yes, but numbers - even ones we work quite hard to compile - sometimes just aren't as definitive as we'd like.

So you are saying you have no opinion on how good he is? Why argue about whether or not an arguement holds up if you don't have an opinion yourself?

[zoogs]

Oh, man! Sorry, Nate Silver. I certainly didn't set out to tear down the world of sports statistics.

 

Then again, maybe we can accept that not all analyses are created equal, and that some stats based arguments might have merit and some might not?

 

caveman, I just saw an argument made that I felt wasn't that solid. You're right, I don't really have much of an opinion on Smith. Or, I guess I do, but it's based on pretty much nothing.

 

OK, enough snarkyness from me. As far as stats-based arguments in general go, I think they're tricky because you can slice the data in so many ways. I've made my share of them and I'm sure they've been mostly or all faulty or worthy of criticism and dissection. I find those kinds of discussions interesting and worthwhile. I really didn't mean to rub anyone the wrong way. And, I remember Blackshirts316 making a number of very compelling and well-researched compilations that I did think were solid. But in the end, what do I know? We're all guilty of being susceptible to misconstruing statistics.

[knapplc]

Silly me. I based my opinion on watching his highlights and the stats he put up in the context of the level of competition he faced.

[NUance]

Oh, man! Sorry, Nate Silver. I certainly didn't set out to tear down the world of sports statistics.

No Poblano.

 

 

/ that was a play on words--an alias of Nate Silver. In case it was too obscure. lol

[knapplc]

Interesting tidbit about Smith from the Wyoming blogs:

 

LINK

 

Record Watch: Smith enters the game 5 passing attempts away from breaking the Wyoming and Mountain West record for most pass attempts in a row without and interception thrown, the record is currently held by Wyoming native Casey Bramlet with 178 attempts. Smith’s 174 consecutive attempts is tied with Central Florida’s Blake Bortles for the country’s the longest active streak. The NCAA record is 379, held by Russell Wilson.

[Creighton Duke]

That's a good read by McKinney, especially about that 1994 game. I was at that game and I thought for sure we were going to lose. I have vivid memories of Cowboy receivers running free through the Husker secondary, over and over and over. We finally started putting pressure on the QB and got some good hits on him. I didn't remember that we knocked him out of the game, though.

Pretty sure it was the hit at :32 in this video. Brutal and would most likely draw a flag today.

Enjoyable, nonetheless

[ZRod]

Oh, man! Sorry, Nate Silver. I certainly didn't set out to tear down the world of sports statistics.

 

Then again, maybe we can accept that not all analyses are created equal, and that some stats based arguments might have merit and some might not?

 

caveman, I just saw an argument made that I felt wasn't that solid. You're right, I don't really have much of an opinion on Smith. Or, I guess I do, but it's based on pretty much nothing.

 

OK, enough snarkyness from me. As far as stats-based arguments in general go, I think they're tricky because you can slice the data in so many ways. I've made my share of them and I'm sure they've been mostly or all faulty or worthy of criticism and dissection. I find those kinds of discussions interesting and worthwhile. I really didn't mean to rub anyone the wrong way. And, I remember Blackshirts316 making a number of very compelling and well-researched compilations that I did think were solid. But in the end, what do I know? We're all guilty of being susceptible to misconstruing statistics.

Silly me. I based my opinion on watching his highlights and the stats he put up in the context of the level of competition he faced.

Mod fight!

[Count 'Bility]

Oh, man! Sorry, Nate Silver. I certainly didn't set out to tear down the world of sports statistics.

 

Then again, maybe we can accept that not all analyses are created equal, and that some stats based arguments might have merit and some might not?

 

caveman, I just saw an argument made that I felt wasn't that solid. You're right, I don't really have much of an opinion on Smith. Or, I guess I do, but it's based on pretty much nothing.

 

OK, enough snarkyness from me. As far as stats-based arguments in general go, I think they're tricky because you can slice the data in so many ways. I've made my share of them and I'm sure they've been mostly or all faulty or worthy of criticism and dissection. I find those kinds of discussions interesting and worthwhile. I really didn't mean to rub anyone the wrong way. And, I remember Blackshirts316 making a number of very compelling and well-researched compilations that I did think were solid. But in the end, what do I know? We're all guilty of being susceptible to misconstruing statistics.

Silly me. I based my opinion on watching his highlights and the stats he put up in the context of the level of competition he faced.

Mod fight!

Obviously an indication of cracks in the foundation of the HuskerBoard program. I expect shaky performances this season. Forsee changes in the near future.