157.1

[ViperVisor]

Puhleaze. I would've been fine with someone claiming that Alex Smith would develop into a mediocre starter, and with help of the best defense and running game in the league, would QB us to the NFCCG. That's realistic. What's not realistic is saying that Alex Smith is a top-10 QB, and it has apparently become blood-libel to speak otherwise about him on this board.

Libel is more your style.

a top-10 QB that peaks at 9 is what I said in a reply. In a group with QBs 9-12. That is as high as anyone here that I've seen. Nobody is saying elite, top 5.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Libel is more your style.

a top-10 QB that peaks at 9 is what I said in a reply. In a group with QBs 9-12. That is as high as anyone here that I've seen. Nobody is saying elite, top 5.

Then we'll agree to disagree. I think he's more around 15, and has been maxed out both physically and mentally. We'll see.

 

[abaskin18]

I'm too experienced, pessimistic, and paranoid not to clarify it. I've had people misinterpret emails where I thought the sarcasm was obvious and no matter how I try to explain post-reaction, it's rarely ever cleared up. People just assume the worst sometimes, so I put disclaimers in.

I've actually had someone tell me that Stephen Colbert is an idiot conservative, and I don't know if they were kidding (I know the person and how daft they can be). I responded sarcastically saying that the audience knows he's full of shit and is clearly laughing at him, to which he agreed. He said he only saw a segment and couldn't see why anyone would watch someone so extreme. I don't talk much to him, but you can't pick your coworkers, can you? (Unless you're the boss.)

Sure. I'd just rather those 'folks' self-identify their ignorance. Either way, I like what you did there.

 

[SY8goat]

I'm too experienced, pessimistic, and paranoid not to clarify it. I've had people misinterpret emails where I thought the sarcasm was obvious and no matter how I try to explain post-reaction, it's rarely ever cleared up. People just assume the worst sometimes, so I put disclaimers in.

I've actually had someone tell me that Stephen Colbert is an idiot conservative, and I don't know if they were kidding (I know the person and how daft they can be). I responded sarcastically saying that the audience knows he's full of shit and is clearly laughing at him, to which he agreed. He said he only saw a segment and couldn't see why anyone would watch someone so extreme. I don't talk much to him, but you can't pick your coworkers, can you? (Unless you're the boss.)

That is funny.

Colbert does do his job well.

 

[Bemular]

The problem with statistics is often not the statistics but rather how they are created, interpreted and applied.

This the the closest we got to a cogent point.

Within the context of this discussion would you care to effort an attempt at getting closer?

Yes, the numbers are science.

Statistics are only as scientific as the data they measure and the methods by which that data was collected. Therefore, I would hardly consider the vast majority of NFL statistics to qualify as science.

But we are dealing with a situation like Jurassic Park where we discovered pure QB DNA and are just comparing segments of today's QBs to that answer key.

No, no we are not dealing with dinosaurs. This fails on so many levels. Here are just a couple. First, we are not comparing QB's across era's; second, even if we were the intangible characteristics of a good, very good, excellent and even elite QB are the same today as they were during the NFL Jurassic era; therefore the "answer key" and thus the "answers" are the same.

Really not sure what the hell you were trying to prove here but comparing NFL QB's to dinosaurs is just weird.

E.g., if you were asked to name five elite NFL QB's, (I assume) you could do this without so much as a peek at any stat sheet. Furthermore, you would very likely stay with your list despite any statistical evidence to the contrary.

This is because I am already well aware of the stats and play of some QBs.

Glad to see you mention the word "play" in your response. Allow me to illustrate more clearly. Would you trade Alex for either Andrew or RG-III? I expect your answer to be no.

But, if I'm wrong and your answer is yes then what information would you base your decision on - the vast database of statistics each has compiled?

There were some on this board that wanted Luck before he even took his first NFL snap - guess what, they were right! Now how is that possible?

The point is simply this, statistics do not tell the story they are the product of the story which leads to the problem that most nimrods such as Flyingiguana et. al., haven't a clue either what statistics are or the story that created them.

Reiterated more convulsion so you just threw in the nimrod comment.

I used Nimrod in the biblical sense. Clearly you have heard this word before in a different sense.

So, what they do is just make up a story to fit the statistics; such as, Alex Smith has a high QBr therefore he is suddenly a top-ten QB, and other really stupid shit like that.

High QB Rating = good logic is actually really stupid?

Brilliant! No, wait, what-the-fuck are you saying?

When the statistics suddenly turn south, as they did during the Giants game, quite predictably they will switch from using statistics to support their delusion to making up excuses to support their delusion.

When the statistics suddenly turn north, as they did during 2011 and 2012, quite predictably they will switch from using statistics to support their delusion to making up excuses to support their delusion.

My delusion is that Alex is a decent NFL game manager but as a QB he is mediocre. This delusion comes without excuses and regardless of his statistics.

Your delusion is that Alex has become a top-ten QB because of his statistics. However, when his statistics suddenly fail to support this delusion you immediately usher in any excuse you can get your hands on even if that means making one up.

I'm comfortable with my delusion just as I'm sure you are comfortable with yours.

ESPN's QBR is garbage

Not garbage but it has problems, when it was promo'd like mad you would see things that made it look in need of changes. I don't know if they have tried to do that or not. Haven't paid much attention to it.

So typical - on the one hand you agree it has problems while on the other hand you admit you pay little attention to it. Yet, just like something else you know very little about you have an opinion.

This was a really terrible post. How you can't see the opposite case that could be made with slight changes is telling.

My case is that statistics are the bi-product of some event, a story if you will and that you haven't a clue how to interpret either the event or the statistics.

Please show me where you made slight changes to prove that the event or story is in fact the bi-product of statistics and you have even the slightest clue how to interpret both.

Hell I'll give you points if you can just point out anything at all in your post that is even remotely intelligent.

 

[Bemular]

I didn't know you you were just using the 8 to start.

Ted Ginn returned a kick and a punt. 206-14=192=24.0 PPG

Which is STILL higher than 2012!!

Look kid, you have about as much of a chance of winning an argument with me as Ron Jeremy has of winning an itty bitty cock contest.

When you first proposed this argument you claimed we had scored more "total points" over last year - you were wrong. You then switched the argument to being relative to the league - that was stupid.

You then intimated the difference was so small it was not worth mentioning but you used a 16-game average to compare to an 8-game average - that was not just stupid, that was really stupid.

And now you want to change the argument yet again from PPG to OPPG so you can remove Ginn's ST's points; and yet, even when you do your initial argument, as I mentioned at the opening of this post, is still wrong.

Look, you knew this was a failed argument when you had your mom do math; and yet, incredibly, you STILL presented the argument! Why?

 

[Bemular]

so u mean to tell me he wasn't accurate?

So you mean to tell me that hitting receivers "in stride" is the only definition of accuracy? I'm sure that is news to a lot of people. We threw two fly-routes on Monday night. Everything else was hooks, curls, flats, digs, hitches, outs, etc. In other words they were stop/timing or dump-off routes - not hit the receiver in stride routes.

 

[yossarian]

Peter King MMQB

This was embedded on page three or something, so I just copied and pasted the section on Alex Smith, enjoy.



Let's not forget the game Alex Smith played in Arizona
It's always easy to dump on Alex Smith. Is there a young quarterback in NFL history who, in the first 16 games he played as a pro, lost by 39, 35, 38, 41 and 31 points; a quarterback who'd been given up for dead time after time in his star-crossed career; a player who -- after leading his team to the conference title game -- watched his team flirt with another quarterback to take his place, and, in response, took a forlorn free agent trip to the last place he ever wanted to be?
Smith didn't play Sunday; the 49ers had their bye this weekend. But I didn't want the week to get away from us without extolling his virtues after his performance last Monday. His numbers were alarmingly good: 18 of 19 for 232 yards, with three touchdowns and no interceptions -- and the one incompletion was a clear drop by Delanie Walker.
There was something else notable about his game: Not one of his 19 throws (20, actually, if you count one that was negated by penalty) was off-target. His accuracy, in a word, was stunning. I watched the game again on NFL Game Rewind, focusing on each of the 20 throws, and watching each one several times, running it back and forth. Though he threw short much of the night, he did have completions that traveled 10, 11, 15, 20 and 22 yards past the line of scrimmage. Here's how I graded the 20 throws:
A (perfectly accurate, hitting his receiver in stride): 15 throws
B (accurate, but receiver reached slightly away from body): 3
C (passable, catchable throw; if missed, would have been a drop): 2
D (poor throw that would have been a great catch): 0
F (significantly off target): 0
Smith's two Cs came on his eighth and ninth passes of the game, early in the second quarter. The first was a sliding-on-his-knees catch by wideout Kyle Williams on a low throw that led him well. The second: a crossing route dropped by Walker -- slightly behind him, but Walker erred because he tried to run with it before concentrating on securing it. The final 11 passes (10 As and a B) were all thrown the way quarterbacks are taught: leading the receiver, throwing so the receiver can make significant yards after the catch.
"It's good you noticed that,'' Smith told me. "Putting the ball in the right spot, in the right time, when he's expecting it, is a crucial part of the passing game, I think. So many guys talk about yards after the catch, and I've always believed the quarterback has a huge responsibility there -- it's not just the receiver. A quarterback has to put it on the receiver and give his guys the opportunity to make plays downfield. Joe Montana was great at that. I have a lot of respect for Tom Brady with that now. Watch how he gets the ball to [Wes] Welker in stride, so he can run after the catch.''
It stands to reason, then, that Smith would have a good yards per attempt average. Just how good, I didn't know until I looked. I interrupt this note to bring you ...
Stat of the Week
Comparing the quarterbacks
Player Yds/Att. Comp
P. Manning, Denver 8.23 69.5
Freeman, Tampa Bay 8.09 55.7
Newton, Carolina 8.09 57.0
Ryan, Atlanta 7.96 68.9
Smith, San Francisco 7.94 69.4
Schaub, Houston 7.70 63.9
E. Manning, NY Giants 7.63 61.0
Griffin, Washington 7.61 65.6
Brady, New England 7.53 65.3
Romo, Dallas 7.53 66.4
Dalton, Cincinnati 7.47 63.9
Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh 7.39 67.1
Brees, New Orleans 7.33 59.7
Rodgers, Green Bay 7.29 67.0
Flacco, Baltimore 7.21 59.8
Rating the best quarterbacks in football in yards per attempt and accuracy through nine weeks (not including Eagles-Saints tonight) shows Smith, at the NFL's midpoint, is second in completion percentage and fifth in yards per attempt, two key indicators for quarterback play. Guess who's first in each category? Peyton Manning.
Two other points to make from watching the 49ers passing game:
Randy Moss is a significant presence in the offense, despite have 13 catches in eight games. Perfect example: Late in the first half, Moss took two defenders deep on a corner route -- a coverage error by the Cards -- and left Mario Manningham alone to catch an easy seven-yard out route in stride. Smith threw a nine-yard TD pass to Michael Crabtree on the next snap.
I counted three times in the game that Moss almost magnetically took coverage away from sideline throws and gave 49ers receivers big openings. "You definitely have a point there,'' Smith said. "On that play to Mario, I'm reading from the top down there -- Randy on the corner route, where he draws coverage, and then down to Mario, who's open. Since the beginning of the season, we've seen DBs [defensive backs] give Randy respect, and he gets safety help. The last few weeks, he and Vernon Davis, as well, have forced teams to concentrate on taking the big play away. So the money to be made in our offense is underneath."
Hard to pass judgment on this just from watching every play in the passing game one week, but I didn't see receivers show any sign of ego or anger for not getting the ball when open. You know how you see, on iso-camera replays, receivers sometimes waving for the ball, or jumping up and down when they don't get it, or showing some emotion when they think the ball should have come to them? None of that here. Again, don't draw any conclusions based on one rout of the Cardinals.
"I'm telling you, we have a lot of selfless guys, and a great example is Randy,'' said Smith. "Everyone knows he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but he has a role here. He blocks in the run game. He does what he's told to do. He's set the tone for our receivers.''
I asked Smith how often Moss has come back to the huddle saying he had an edge on a corner, or how often in an offensive meeting he talked about how some route would be perfect for him against a certain coverage. "Not a single time,'' said Smith. "Never once. Never says, 'I saw this out there -- get it to me.' Nothing like that. The honest truth is he's taken so much pride in things that no one would notice, like the run game, that the other guys have no choice but to follow his lead."
There's a lot to like about the Niners. They've allowed six points or fewer in four of their last five games. The offense knows what it is -- a move-the-chains deal with a smart quarterback who, most importantly, knows who he is. Smith had a crummy game against the Giants and contributed to San Francisco's downfall in a major way that afternoon. But I really like what I've seen out of him this year, mostly. He's as accurate an intermediate passer as I've seen this season. I think he's going to be asset, not a question mark, as the 49ers make a Super Bowl push.


Read more: Chuck Pagano, Andrew Luck, Sean Payton, Doug Martin, more Week 9 thoughts - Peter King - SI.com

 

[ViperVisor]

Don't "quote" things that aren't posted. I never claimed we scored more total points this year. I wasn't wrong. From what I looked up it was down this year over last. I never said anything about the rest of the league. You must be getting my things mixed up with someone else.

It appears Flyingiguana saw some wrong info that had our PPG up.

The difference is so small to not tell you any real difference if it is .2
How is using all the games of 2011 and all from 2012 stupid? It is the most accurate way to do it.

The Ginn returns taken out makes the 2012 point total so far a little higher than 2011. I don't understand what you are saying is wrong.



So it boils down to the facts that we can find don't really matter.
You have the time to observe everything and ability to wring out the truth in your mind.

And you are going overboard with all the insults.

 

[Bemular]

Don't "quote" things that aren't posted. I never claimed we scored more total points this year. I wasn't wrong. From what I looked up it was down this year over last. I never said anything about the rest of the league. You must be getting my things mixed up with someone else.

It appears Flyingiguana saw some wrong info that had our PPG up.

The difference is so small to not tell you any real difference if it is .2
How is using all the games of 2011 and all from 2012 stupid? It is the most accurate way to do it.

The Ginn returns taken out makes the 2012 point total so far a little higher than 2011. I don't understand what you are saying is wrong.



So it boils down to the facts that we can find don't really matter.
You have the time to observe everything and ability to wring out the truth in your mind.

And you are going overboard with all the insults.

You adopted iguana's argument and therefore made it your own. Perhaps the next time you decide to hijack someone elses opinion you will make sure doing so won't make you look like an idiot.

For what it is worth I am of the mind that you and iguana are the same poster. As for the insults, I'll make you a deal - you stop being an idiot and I'll stop calling you one.

When you post something don't try to lie and squirm your way out of what you posted by suddenly changing the content or context. I wouldn't do that to you or anyone else - When my posts are busted for inaccuracies I own them and move on. I expect you to do the same.

Fair?

 

[ViperVisor]

You adopted iguana's argument and therefore made it your own. Perhaps the next time you decide to hijack someone elses opinion you will make sure doing so won't make you look like an idiot.

For what it is worth I am of the mind that you and iguana are the same poster. As for the insults, I'll make you a deal - you stop being an idiot and I'll stop calling you one.

When you post something don't try to lie and squirm your way out of what you posted by suddenly changing the content or context. I wouldn't do that to you or anyone else - When my posts are busted for inaccuracies I own them and move on. I expect you to do the same.

Fair?

Not fair.

What did I say that was wrong that I lied or squirmed out of?

 

[clyde_carbon]

Just what we need. Another Alex Smith thread. Perfect.

You couldn't post this in the other running Alex Smith thread, why?

 

[wartyOne]

This thread still exists?

Kinda like arguing abortion, no?

 

[Bemular]

PPG is down .2

That is 1.6 total over 8 games.

If Akers had only missed 4 FG not 5 + the one that got blocked isn't counted. We are at 24.0 PPG not 23.6

Listen-up ass clown - Through 8 games in 2011 we scored 206 points for an average of 25.8 PPG. This year we are at 189 points for an average of 23.6 PPG.

The difference is 2.2 PPG on a stat sheet - However, when you factor in our offensive improvements year over year the difference is even bigger. Do you get that?

I didn't know you you were just using the 8 to start.

Ted Ginn returned a kick and a punt. 206-14=192=24.0 PPG

Not fair.

What did I say that was wrong that I lied or squirmed out of?

Let's begin with the above exchange -

In your first post above you quoted the PPG difference at .2 which was derrived by taking ALL our points scored last year and dividing them by 16 games.

2011 = (380 Pts/16 games = 23.8 PPG)
2012 = (189 Pts/8 games = 23.6 PPG)

Difference = .2



In my next post I called you out on your math and gave you the correct comparative figures.



You then decided to change the argument from PPG to OPPG by removing Ginn's points. Citing "[Oh] I didn't know you you were just using the 8 to start."

Seriously?!? Do you actually know people who buy this squirmy-ass lying bullshit from you?


Not fair? Fine with me

 

[ViperVisor]

I am not lying and you didn't have to call me out. I didn't know it was comparing only games 1-8.

Your point then was correct and iguana was wrong. Now why were we on the points discussion in the first place?

Because points on the board is the point of the offense.
So looking at the offense and the end product you want; How it is going compared to last year?
Production is up some but points aren't.

Why? Some of it is this...

Through 8 games in 2011 we had 2 Ginn Returns and Akers was on fire. + A Rodgers TD
Through 8 games in 2012 we had 0 Ginn Returns and Akers not on fire + A Rodgers TD

That is about 3 bonus TDs worth of points we got that hasn't happened in 2012. So the offense is nearly the same at getting points at this point in 2012.


The offense needs to score more points. Hoping for Ginn and Akers to light it up on special teams is not good idea.

It certainly looks like things are on a better track. We got 8 more games before the playoffs and need to be more consistent on offense and get into the endzone more.

 

[yossarian]

Just what we need. Another Alex Smith thread. Perfect.

You couldn't post this in the other running Alex Smith thread, why?

Jesus Clyde, don't be so goddam sensitive. I thought it was interesting his thoughts about Smith's game. It wasn't another rant for or against Smith, it was just an article about his game. If you turn it into some thread that he sucks, that Jay Cutler is better, that you'd trade him for a six pack of warm beer, that's your issue not mine. I like reading Peter King sometimes and thought he had interesting stuff to say.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Jesus Clyde, don't be so goddam sensitive. I thought it was interesting his thoughts about Smith's game. It wasn't another rant for or against Smith, it was just an article about his game. If you turn it into some thread that he sucks, that Jay Cutler is better, that you'd trade him for a six pack of warm beer, that's your issue not mine. I like reading Peter King sometimes and thought he had interesting stuff to say.

We already have a running thread about Smith. You could've posted it in there.

On that note, I'm gonna go ahead and put this in there.

 

[Flyingiguana]

Then we'll agree to disagree. I think he's more around 15, and has been maxed out both physically and mentally. We'll see.

i put smith around 12-13 area, so really we're not too far apart. but i still think he can improve. or maybe thats just me being optimistic.

but, if he doesn't, we have this freak of nature sitting and learning.

 

[wartyOne]

Jesus Clyde, don't be so goddam sensitive. I thought it was interesting his thoughts about Smith's game. It wasn't another rant for or against Smith, it was just an article about his game. If you turn it into some thread that he sucks, that Jay Cutler is better, that you'd trade him for a six pack of warm beer, that's your issue not mine. I like reading Peter King sometimes and thought he had interesting stuff to say.

Depends on the beer. I wouldn't trade him for a six pack of warm Bud, but I'd trade him for a six pack of ANY American IPA.

This is called a beer joke. I expect most won't get it.

Thread, hijacked.

 

[MHSL82]

Depends on the beer. I wouldn't trade him for a six pack of warm Bud, but I'd trade him for a six pack of ANY American IPA.

This is called a beer joke. I expect most won't get it.

Thread, hijacked.

(Referring to my post.)