- Thread starter
- #141
SteelersPride
Well-Known Member
Elliot is the teams top kicker is he the top player as wel?
Border pro bowl?He is though. He’s a good player with injury issues. If healthy, he’d be the starting RB and potentially a border line pro bowler, which he made once already in his career.
Border pro bowl?
This could have been a straight up hit piece.
But the norm is that there is usually some truth to these things.
.
It’s a stretch but I’ll allow itBorder line.
He already made one. He’s a pro bowl talent.
I’m asking bc I don’t kniw the targets are the same? I find that hard to believeSounds like a beefed up / spiced up version of what most observers already noted throughout the season.
O yeah, the 'favourites' element is rather negligible (the numbers of Ertz and Jeffery under Foles and Wentz are pretty much identical).
Primary elements already noted before-hand by observers: Wentz trying to play 'hero'-ball, rather than play within himself and the offense. Something that (hopefully) will improve with experience. And that pretty much covers all the negative elements in this piece.
I’m asking bc I don’t kniw the targets are the same? I find that hard to believe
Santoliquito does not mention the targets per game rate of that trio under Nick Foles. And even if he did, straight per game averages can be misleading, if one player has significantly more attempts per game, that’s going to effect everyone. So instead let’s look at how Wentz and Foles distributed their passes to that trio, since the takeaway from the piece is that Wentz was targeting Ertz at the expense of Jeffery and Agholor, and Foles wasn’t. The stats simply don’t back up that narrative. They saw pretty much the same distribution of targets regardless of who was at QB.
Wentz/Foles Targets (% of throws):
Wentz: Ertz 26.4%; Jeffery 20.3%; Agholor 15%
Foles: Ertz 24.4%, Jeffery 19%, Agholor 17.3%
To even out Ertz’s 2% difference, he would need 3 less targets in their 11 games together from Wentz and 3 more from Foles in their 7 games together.
Source: Did Carson Wentz "over target" Zach Ertz?
NOTE: Jeffery was out for the first game (against Indianapolis) that Wentz was back! So that means that the comparison targeting Jeffery stat is actually skewed in favour of Foles, since it is reasonable to assume that Wentz would have targeted Jeffery numerous times had he been available in the Indianapolis game.
In many ways these differences are negligible.
BTW, as far as Santoliquito being a respected writer, though I myself am not from Philly, I have come across rather mixed reviews of his work (he also writes about other sports):
A reporter who generally sources well, and generally there is some core of truth in what he writes, but he usually puts his own rather creative spin on it.
At least that is the impression I get from the way the reporters on Broad Street Hockey talk about Santoloquito's writings about the Flyers, or the reactions of the likes of Tommy Lawlor, Sheil Kapadia, Bo Wulff, the reporters on Bleeding Green Nation, and Dave Zangaro. I have not seen Reuben Frank's opinion, and Jimmy Kempski has to be quiet since he also writes about the Eagles for Phillyvoice - though based on his previous writings, I suspect he would be in line with the likes of Lawlor, Kapadia and Zangaro.
You will, he just hasn't played in enough games yet.I’ve never heard of him.
You will, he just hasn't played in enough games yet.
Oh my bad I thought we were still talking about Wentz
none of this has anything to do with you crediting or discrediting a reporter. Side step much?So not true dude. I’ve always been fair and ripped the Eagles. I just happen to think Wentz is a star.
Typical Philidiot.
Is that even a word?
It’s a madeup word that he incorrectly believes is clever and therefore keeps using.
I’ve been at work, saw a bit of this at lunch.
Basically eagles fans are discrediting the article.
Now the entire eagles team has stood up dang the pledge of allegiance and swore to Carson Wentz.
And anyone thinking there may some truth to this is a troll?
Is that where we are?