Zoom/SoxNats argument

Harper41 wrote:

Ricky Williams was also out of the NFL for a couple seasons so hes probably more fresh than the average 31 year old, just saying. Unless hes still smoking grass.

being out of the NFL should just have made him rusty, sure he'd be a bit fresher but being in and out of the NFL like that is gonna do more harm than good.

plus one or two of those years he was in the CFL.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Also, Ricky Williams had a lot fewer carries than Westbrook (160 carries, 29 receptions vs. Westbrook's 233 carries, 54 receptions). So it's easier to have a greater YPC when you have fewer carries, because your long runs carry more weight. Also, Williams YPC was 0.1 higher than Westbrooks'. Big whoop.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 0.1 higher is still better is it not?

he had 70% of Westbrooks carries, if the numbers were like 100 vs 233 id care, but 160 is still more than enough runs to effectively negate any significant distorting effects to his ypc.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Also, Ricky Williams had a lot fewer carries than Westbrook (160 carries, 29 receptions vs. Westbrook's 233 carries, 54 receptions). So it's easier to have a greater YPC when you have fewer carries, because your long runs carry more weight. Also, Williams YPC was 0.1 higher than Westbrooks'. Big whoop.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 0.1 higher is still better is it not?

he had 70% of Westbrooks carries, if the numbers were like 100 vs 233 id care, but 160 is still more than enough runs to effectively negate any significant distorting effects to his ypc.

It's better by a negligible difference. Honestly, the fact that he had a higher YPC holds very little weight since it was by 0.1.

Each of his big runs counts for more... Williams also had a very good running back to pair with him in Ronnie Brown. Westbrook has Correll Buckhalter, who isn't the best back.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Also, Ricky Williams had a lot fewer carries than Westbrook (160 carries, 29 receptions vs. Westbrook's 233 carries, 54 receptions). So it's easier to have a greater YPC when you have fewer carries, because your long runs carry more weight. Also, Williams YPC was 0.1 higher than Westbrooks'. Big whoop.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 0.1 higher is still better is it not?

he had 70% of Westbrooks carries, if the numbers were like 100 vs 233 id care, but 160 is still more than enough runs to effectively negate any significant distorting effects to his ypc.

It's better by a negligible difference. Honestly, the fact that he had a higher YPC holds very little weight since it was by 0.1.

Each of his big runs counts for more... Williams also had a very good running back to pair with him in Ronnie Brown. Westbrook has Correll Buckhalter, who isn't the best back.

the fact that Ricky Williams is a bad football player and has a 0.1 higher ypc getting 70% of the carries as Westbrook holds more than a little weight.

Williams has 160 rushes, thats a high number of carries. So if a significant portion of those rushes were for big gains thats because of skill, the only way outliers would really distort his ypc is if he had 1-80 carries.

Since Westie gets more carries HE HAS HAD MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET THOSE LARGE RUNS. If a player breaks a 40 yard run 10% of the time and rushes 100 times hes expected to break ten 40 yard runs. Now if another player breaks a 40 yard run 10% of the time and rushes 200 times, hes expected to break twenty 40 yard runs. If both players average 4.0 ypc before you factor in those 40 yard runs, theyre still going to have the same ypc after you factor in the 40 yard runs. You cant make that arguement because you're literally talking out of your ass as you dont know how many big rushes Williams broke and you dont know how many Westbrook broke. Here is a fact though, Westbrook had 4 rushes last season over 30 yards, Williams had 2, so you can pretty much throw your arguement out the window.

And I dont care if Williams had Adrian Peterson pairing with him to be quite honest, I see no way how that effects the fact that running behind Jake Long the dolphins averaged 5.0 ypc. Williams/Brown/Cobbs were more effective running the ball than Westbrook/Buckhalter, bottomline. Dolphins averaged more ypc running behind Long than any of their other starting OL, bottomline.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

the fact that Ricky Williams is a bad football player and has a 0.1 higher ypc getting 70% of the carries as Westbrook holds more than a little weight.

Williams has 160 rushes, thats a high number of carries. So if a significant portion of those rushes were for big gains thats because of skill, the only way outliers would really distort his ypc is if he had 1-80 carries.

Since Westie gets more carries HE HAS HAD MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET THOSE LARGE RUNS. If a player breaks a 40 yard run 10% of the time and rushes 100 times hes expected to break ten 40 yard runs. Now if another player breaks a 40 yard run 10% of the time and rushes 200 times, hes expected to break twenty 40 yard runs. If both players average 4.0 ypc before you factor in those 40 yard runs, theyre still going to have the same ypc after you factor in the 40 yard runs. You cant make that arguement because you're literally talking out of your ass as you dont know how many big rushes Williams broke and you dont know how many Westbrook broke. Here is a fact though, Westbrook had 4 rushes last season over 30 yards, Williams had 2, so you can pretty much throw your arguement out the window.

And I dont care if Williams had Adrian Peterson pairing with him to be quite honest, I see no way how that effects the fact that running behind Jake Long the dolphins averaged 5.0 ypc. Williams/Brown/Cobbs were more effective running the ball than Westbrook/Buckhalter, bottomline. Dolphins averaged more ypc running behind Long than any of their other starting OL, bottomline.

Williams isn't a bad football player...

Westbrook has more opportunities to get the large runs, but they count for less, so this point doesn't matter that much. So Westbrook had 4 and Williams had 2. Since Ricky had 70% of the carries, you can set it up like this:

4/100 < 3/70

So Williams has a higher percentage of big runs...

It completely affects the YPC. Is your stat referring to when the Fins ran behind Long, or when they ran it period? Because the Fins have a very solid offensive line besides Long.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Williams isn't a bad football player...

sure

SoxNats09 wrote:

Westbrook has more opportunities to get the large runs, but they count for less, so this point doesn't matter that much. So Westbrook had 4 and Williams had 2. Since Ricky had 70% of the carries, you can set it up like this:

4/100 < 3/70

ummm... its 2/70 not 3/70
2/70 = 1/35
4/100 = 1/25

nice math

SoxNats09 wrote:

So Williams DOESNT have a higher percentage of big runs...

fixed

SoxNats09 wrote:

It completely affects the YPC. Is your stat referring to when the Fins ran behind Long, or when they ran it period? Because the Fins have a very solid offensive line besides Long.

The stat refers to running behind Long, not their ypc period. Their combined ypc would be around 4.2

Yeah whatever I meant 2/70 That's not bad math, I just misread what you wrote, my math was correct.

And anyway, you've only made a case for rushing stats, and Thomas allowed 2 sacks. Long gave up 2.5. So Thomas is a better pass protector, and Long is a better run blocker. At LT, pass blocking is more important than run blocking.

You guys should chill out, it's not a big deal which player is better... after all, it's not like it really affects you

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah whatever I meant 2/70 That's not bad math, I just misread what you wrote, my math was correct.

And anyway, you've only made a case for rushing stats, and Thomas allowed 2 sacks. Long gave up 2.5. So Thomas is a better pass protector, and Long is a better run blocker. At LT, pass blocking is more important than run blocking.

At LT, pass blocking is important if you're a passing team, run blocking is important if you're a running team. Both teams can be classified as running teams (you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme shifts from your star players primary role). A position and player is important to a team only if its what your team revolves around. If a team never passes the ball, then how is pass blocking going to be important for a LT. Look at Tra's prior stats, you'll see hes not even that great of a pass blocker (I think 6 sacks allowed in 08' and 7 the year before).

id take ~0.6-0.7 more ypc (that amounts to maybe 80 total yards due to long) over half a sack (which detracts maybe 4 yards of offense on long's shoulders) ANYDAY. Given that the sacks are only off by 0.5 where as ypc is off by more, longs run blocking abilities heavily outweight tra's pass blocking abilities, making long much more valuable.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah whatever I meant 2/70 That's not bad math, I just misread what you wrote, my math was correct.

And anyway, you've only made a case for rushing stats, and Thomas allowed 2 sacks. Long gave up 2.5. So Thomas is a better pass protector, and Long is a better run blocker. At LT, pass blocking is more important than run blocking.

At LT, pass blocking is important if you're a passing team, run blocking is important if you're a running team. Both teams can be classified as running teams (you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme shifts from your star players primary role). A position and player is important to a team only if its what your team revolves around. If a team never passes the ball, then how is pass blocking going to be important for a LT. Look at Tra's prior stats, you'll see hes not even that great of a pass blocker (I think 6 sacks allowed in 08' and 7 the year before).

id take ~0.6-0.7 more ypc (that amounts to maybe 80 total yards due to long) over half a sack (which detracts maybe 4 yards of offense on long's shoulders) ANYDAY. Given that the sacks are only off by 0.5 where as ypc is off by more, longs run blocking abilities heavily outweight tra's pass blocking abilities, making long much more valuable.

He had 3 in 2006, I couldn't find 07 and 08. The Eagles pass 60.8% of the time, which is 6th in the NFL after Arizona, Indy, Detroit, Denver, and New Orleans. So I definitely wouldn't classify them as a running team.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah whatever I meant 2/70 That's not bad math, I just misread what you wrote, my math was correct.

And anyway, you've only made a case for rushing stats, and Thomas allowed 2 sacks. Long gave up 2.5. So Thomas is a better pass protector, and Long is a better run blocker. At LT, pass blocking is more important than run blocking.

At LT, pass blocking is important if you're a passing team, run blocking is important if you're a running team. Both teams can be classified as running teams (you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme shifts from your star players primary role). A position and player is important to a team only if its what your team revolves around. If a team never passes the ball, then how is pass blocking going to be important for a LT. Look at Tra's prior stats, you'll see hes not even that great of a pass blocker (I think 6 sacks allowed in 08' and 7 the year before).

id take ~0.6-0.7 more ypc (that amounts to maybe 80 total yards due to long) over half a sack (which detracts maybe 4 yards of offense on long's shoulders) ANYDAY. Given that the sacks are only off by 0.5 where as ypc is off by more, longs run blocking abilities heavily outweight tra's pass blocking abilities, making long much more valuable.

He had 3 in 2006, I couldn't find 07 and 08. The Eagles pass 60.8% of the time, which is 6th in the NFL after Arizona, Indy, Detroit, Denver, and New Orleans. So I definitely wouldn't classify them as a running team.

Quote :

(you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star
player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme
shifts from your star players primary role)

which is why I said that.....

3.25 apparently which isnt substantially impressive and more importantly its worse than what long did this year
http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/playerstats.asp?id=4276&team=30
his sacks allowed never has been overly impressive aside from 06 and 08. Infact for the most part its been awful.

FalconsFan612 wrote:

You guys should chill out, it's not a big deal which player is better... after all, it's not like it really affects you

lol fine ignore me then

FalconsFan612 wrote:

FalconsFan612 wrote:

You guys should chill out, it's not a big deal which player is better... after all, it's not like it really affects you

lol fine ignore me then

I saw it, the thing is im perfectly chill. This is a football league so discussing aspects of football is more than welcome, me and sox are at a disagreement, just because theres a disagreement on the internet doesnt mean that either of the parties involved are upset in any way. I dont take arguements on the internet seriously, for me discussions like this only bring insight, I didnt know that in 06' Tra had allowed 3.25 sacks (infact I thought he had like 8.0) nor did I know that he allowed 2.0 this year, nothing wrong with learning new information.

Only reason im coming down on sox so hard for not presenting facts is because an arguement without facts not only holds no actual value, but it also introduces opinion, opinion is what causes tension.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

FalconsFan612 wrote:

FalconsFan612 wrote:

You guys should chill out, it's not a big deal which player is better... after all, it's not like it really affects you

lol fine ignore me then

I saw it, the thing is im perfectly chill. This is a football league so discussing aspects of football is more than welcome, me and sox are at a disagreement, just because theres a disagreement on the internet doesnt mean that either of the parties involved are upset in any way. I dont take arguements on the internet seriously, for me discussions like this only bring insight, I didnt know that in 06' Tra had allowed 3.25 sacks (infact I thought he had like 8.0) nor did I know that he allowed 2.0 this year, nothing wrong with learning new information.

Only reason im coming down on sox so hard for not presenting facts is because an arguement without facts not only holds no actual value, but it also introduces opinion, opinion is what causes tension.

I see, well I don't know you guys too well so it just seems like you are mad at each other.

And how can you have 3.25 sacks allowed? 4 guys let one of them get the sack?

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah whatever I meant 2/70 That's not bad math, I just misread what you wrote, my math was correct.

And anyway, you've only made a case for rushing stats, and Thomas allowed 2 sacks. Long gave up 2.5. So Thomas is a better pass protector, and Long is a better run blocker. At LT, pass blocking is more important than run blocking.

At LT, pass blocking is important if you're a passing team, run blocking is important if you're a running team. Both teams can be classified as running teams (you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme shifts from your star players primary role). A position and player is important to a team only if its what your team revolves around. If a team never passes the ball, then how is pass blocking going to be important for a LT. Look at Tra's prior stats, you'll see hes not even that great of a pass blocker (I think 6 sacks allowed in 08' and 7 the year before).

id take ~0.6-0.7 more ypc (that amounts to maybe 80 total yards due to long) over half a sack (which detracts maybe 4 yards of offense on long's shoulders) ANYDAY. Given that the sacks are only off by 0.5 where as ypc is off by more, longs run blocking abilities heavily outweight tra's pass blocking abilities, making long much more valuable.

He had 3 in 2006, I couldn't find 07 and 08. The Eagles pass 60.8% of the time, which is 6th in the NFL after Arizona, Indy, Detroit, Denver, and New Orleans. So I definitely wouldn't classify them as a running team.

Quote :

(you could say Philly was a passing/balanced team, but their star
player is a HB, so what does it say about your team if your scheme
shifts from your star players primary role)

which is why I said that.....

3.25 apparently which isnt substantially impressive and more importantly its worse than what long did this year
http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/playerstats.asp?id=4276&team=30
his sacks allowed never has been overly impressive aside from 06 and 08. Infact for the most part its been awful.

Yeah, Andy Reid isn't smart. They still pass a lot.

Thomas also allowed only 2 sacks in 2005. He's given up about 3.5 sacks per year the last 4 years, which is pretty good... you also have to take into account that since the Eagles pass more, he naturally will give up more sacks than Long will.

And I object to where you said I don't provide stats, I've provided plenty of stats.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah, Andy Reid isn't smart. They still pass a lot.

Thomas also allowed only 2 sacks in 2005. He's given up about 3.5 sacks per year the last 4 years, which is pretty good... you also have to take into account that since the Eagles pass more, he naturally will give up more sacks than Long will.

And I object to where you said I don't provide stats, I've provided plenty of stats.

those 2 sacks came in 10 games, so his average over the last four years would most likely be around 4.5, which isnt mind blowing. 4.5 sacks allowed in the last four years and like an average of 7.0 sacks allowed in the years before that certainly doesnt classify him as a top LT in the league. His average over his career would probably hover around 6.0, again, not an overly impressive number.

the only stats ive seen you give are the ones I mentioned in the response to the Falcons GM, a couple regarding Williams and the Eagles being 6th in passing. And you cant argue that you didnt list any stats within the first 3 pages of the arguement. However, id say at least 1/2 to 3/4 of my responses have some facts or statistics included in them.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah, Andy Reid isn't smart. They still pass a lot.

Thomas also allowed only 2 sacks in 2005. He's given up about 3.5 sacks per year the last 4 years, which is pretty good... you also have to take into account that since the Eagles pass more, he naturally will give up more sacks than Long will.

And I object to where you said I don't provide stats, I've provided plenty of stats.

those 2 sacks came in 10 games, so his average over the last four years would most likely be around 4.5, which isnt mind blowing. 4.5 sacks allowed in the last four years and like an average of 7.0 sacks allowed in the years before that certainly doesnt classify him as a top LT in the league. His average over his career would probably hover around 6.0, again, not an overly impressive number.

the only stats ive seen you give are the ones I mentioned in the response to the Falcons GM, a couple regarding Williams and the Eagles being 6th in passing. And you cant argue that you didnt list any stats within the first 3 pages of the arguement. However, id say at least 1/2 to 3/4 of my responses have some facts or statistics included in them.

Again, the Eagles pass more, so naturally he will allow more sacks.

I still used logical information, just not statistics. I didn't say you didn't use stats early on, I was just objecting to you saying I didn't provide stats.

SoxNats09 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah, Andy Reid isn't smart. They still pass a lot.

Thomas also allowed only 2 sacks in 2005. He's given up about 3.5 sacks per year the last 4 years, which is pretty good... you also have to take into account that since the Eagles pass more, he naturally will give up more sacks than Long will.

And I object to where you said I don't provide stats, I've provided plenty of stats.

those 2 sacks came in 10 games, so his average over the last four years would most likely be around 4.5, which isnt mind blowing. 4.5 sacks allowed in the last four years and like an average of 7.0 sacks allowed in the years before that certainly doesnt classify him as a top LT in the league. His average over his career would probably hover around 6.0, again, not an overly impressive number.

the only stats ive seen you give are the ones I mentioned in the response to the Falcons GM, a couple regarding Williams and the Eagles being 6th in passing. And you cant argue that you didnt list any stats within the first 3 pages of the arguement. However, id say at least 1/2 to 3/4 of my responses have some facts or statistics included in them.

Again, the Eagles pass more, so naturally he will allow more sacks.

I still used logical information, just not statistics. I didn't say you didn't use stats early on, I was just objecting to you saying I didn't provide stats.

Again, the Eagles passed more for a reason, and it wasnt always that way.

logical information isnt logical unless it comes from factual or statistical evidence, otherwise its just information which should normally be able to be pieced together.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

SoxNats09 wrote:

Yeah, Andy Reid isn't smart. They still pass a lot.

Thomas also allowed only 2 sacks in 2005. He's given up about 3.5 sacks per year the last 4 years, which is pretty good... you also have to take into account that since the Eagles pass more, he naturally will give up more sacks than Long will.

And I object to where you said I don't provide stats, I've provided plenty of stats.

those 2 sacks came in 10 games, so his average over the last four years would most likely be around 4.5, which isnt mind blowing. 4.5 sacks allowed in the last four years and like an average of 7.0 sacks allowed in the years before that certainly doesnt classify him as a top LT in the league. His average over his career would probably hover around 6.0, again, not an overly impressive number.

the only stats ive seen you give are the ones I mentioned in the response to the Falcons GM, a couple regarding Williams and the Eagles being 6th in passing. And you cant argue that you didnt list any stats within the first 3 pages of the arguement. However, id say at least 1/2 to 3/4 of my responses have some facts or statistics included in them.

Again, the Eagles pass more, so naturally he will allow more sacks.

I still used logical information, just not statistics. I didn't say you didn't use stats early on, I was just objecting to you saying I didn't provide stats.

Again, the Eagles passed more for a reason, and it wasnt always that way.

logical information isnt logical unless it comes from factual or statistical evidence, otherwise its just information which should normally be able to be pieced together.

The reason is that Westbrook is their best offensive player?

Eagles pass more, so naturally Tra Thomas will allow more sacks.

That is not a statistic, it is logical information.

The reason is that their best offensive player (Westbrook), sucked behind bad run support. I think ive gone over that before.

It isnt logical information because anybody can divulge it, dont call common sense logical. Tra Thomas still averages over his long career about 6 sacks/season as a starter, you dont think that detracts from his value? The fact hes had 2 good years in his 10+ year career doesnt make him a good LT either.

All that you're doing is factoring in his pass blocking abilities based on one or two seasons, you're not factoring in those other 12 or so seasons and you arent considering run blocking at all. Sure he did well pass blocking last season, I never said he didnt, but in his whole career he hasnt been impressive and last years poor run support doesnt make him close to being elite.

I conceded that Long was a better run blocker... even then, he gave up what, 7-8 sacks a year? The Eagles pass more, so naturally he gives up more sacks.

Wasn't this arguement supposed to be about whether Ray Lewis was more valuable than Thomas? (which he clearly is)

Mavfatha wrote:

Wasn't this arguement supposed to be about whether Ray Lewis was more valuable than Thomas? (which he clearly is)

The reason I had said that was because Thomas was rated higher than Lewis... that's not really the debate anymore. I think Thomas is a top LT, and Zoom disagrees.

SoxNats09 wrote:

I conceded that Long was a better run blocker... even then, he gave up what, 7-8 sacks a year? The Eagles pass more, so naturally he gives up more sacks.

The broncos pass a lot, clady gave up 0.5 sacks on the season, the Colts' Ryan Diem gave up 1.5 sacks, the Saints' Jamaal Brown gave up 3.0 and Mike Gandy did allow 6.25 but thats less than your 7/year average, and Gandy also did well blocking for Edge. Thats 4 out of the 5 teams starting LTs doing better than Tras career average, 2 doing better than Tra this year. I didnt bother checking for the Lions and simply assumed their LT did worse.

And 7-8 sacks on any team, high passing percentage or not, isnt something you brag about.

Im not saying you're wrong that Tra would have to protect the pass more often in such situations, but it becomes apparent that passing % for teams is probably factored in would explain why you see more sacks for DEs than you see sacks allowed for OTs. Either way theres probably other things to factor in sacks allowed and either way Tra Thomas sux