What would you say...

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by Leathaface:
Ceadder, you are hilarious. I swear your threads seriously make me LOL.

It's B-E-A-R not B-A-R-E. Here's some proof. See definition #9 and a few others.

When you say "bare with me" you're asking us to get naked with you...NO THANKS!

Also, can you please explain to me how 8.5 games with 16 TDs equals 48 TDs - 8 = 40 in a season? LOL

Well color me embarrassed. That's how I grew up with it. And had never been corrected on it. But hey I'm man enough to own it. My bad folks I was wrong on the term.

Also wrong in my math. Should have looked closer on that.

The numbers will be fixed. Thank you for pointing that out. Though actually if you factored in the drops in the End Zone it could still be 40. But I didn't, so I won't.

Obviously English is my strong suit while Algebra is not.

Oh and also 14 games in the books That's 7.5 games not 8.5. Not pointing it out for anything other than the sake of getting the facts right. Smith started 6.5 games in. Correct? Or did I miss something else?

~Ceadder

Well there's your problem. While he did take over in week 7. We had a bye in week 6. Thus only 5.5 games played when he came in.


Don't know exactly how you came up with all this stuff you got going on in your mind. The simplest way to double check yourself would be to actually look at our schedule and count the games since the Houston game.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/sanfrancisco49ers/schedule?team=SF

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Wow really?

1st the Gibberish statement. Umm I admit it's not my best written work. But it sure as hell ain't gibberish.

Now for everyone else.

The numbers were come by honestly. I split his passing average in half on TDs' while giving him his average INT stat for the games that he did not play. This is a reliable formula. It's done ALL THE TIME people. I'm not the first nor will I be the last to put forth a theory based on known statistics.

We know what his average is at this point for every category.

Now realize that I am working backward here. Most people take a couple solid outings and extrapolate them through the rest of the season based on limited info.

I only did it in reverse.

Also I did not base it on just the Spread formation success. I used both Offenses when figuring the numbers.

TDs'

Like I said 2 TDs' a gamex8. He's thrown 3 TD games it's not unheard of for the man to put two scores on the board through the air. But also I dropped 8 for the Run game. So I halved his projected total. Even MORE doable.

INTs'

He's averaging 1.6 a game with 7.5 games under his belt. I took that average and extrapolated that to the 7.5 games he didn't play. I made NO changes in this regard. No increase or decrease for ANY reason whatsoever. We know what he's thrown to this point and it's also reasonable to assign him 1.6 per game prior to when he Started.

Yards

This is the EASIEST of stats to analyze. He's only had ONE 300 yard game. Not great, but he's averaging 200 yards a game. So I assigned 200 yards for the prior games. x8 That's 1600 yards. He has 2k yards right now when rounded up. If he were below 1,750 I would have rounded down. This gives him an ATTAINABLE 3600 yards on to this point of the season.

Sacks

This is also an easy stat to figure out. I used the Sack stat that Hill has and put Alex in a similar situation. He's a bit more mobile so I allowed for that. He also has a quicker release and uses the snap count as well as his arm to get himself out or into trouble. This figured into the INT issue as well so it would be less Sacks taken.

Now I realize the science is lost on people. But the numbers DON'T lie. The numbers say this season Alex IS better than Rodgers.

But you have to be willing to suspend doubt long enough to look and see the theory.

My bad if I confused ya, but I did walk you through it step by step previously.

Think of this as a bit like Sabermetrics. They don't lie. And it's the clearest picture you're going to get short of Alex performing on the field right from the start of the season as he SHOULD have been.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Bare with me now.

No thanks.

Bear with me now.

No thanks to this either

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Ummmm no, and no.

It IS bare not bear.

But thanks for the attempt to correct me on grammar.

There is a reason I get As' on my writing assignments. Also I completely tested out of the English requirements for College.

So get your mind out of the gutter my friend.

~Ceadder

You know how I know when somebody is unsure of their own intelligence...when they have to bring up their grades. Your English is apparently just as good as your grasp of statistics.

Originally posted by ttime1:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Wow really?

1st the Gibberish statement. Umm I admit it's not my best written work. But it sure as hell ain't gibberish.

Now for everyone else.

The numbers were come by honestly. I split his passing average in half on TDs' while giving him his average INT stat for the games that he did not play. This is a reliable formula. It's done ALL THE TIME people. I'm not the first nor will I be the last to put forth a theory based on known statistics.

We know what his average is at this point for every category.

Now realize that I am working backward here. Most people take a couple solid outings and extrapolate them through the rest of the season based on limited info.

I only did it in reverse.

Also I did not base it on just the Spread formation success. I used both Offenses when figuring the numbers.

TDs'

Like I said 2 TDs' a gamex8. He's thrown 3 TD games it's not unheard of for the man to put two scores on the board through the air. But also I dropped 8 for the Run game. So I halved his projected total. Even MORE doable.

INTs'

He's averaging 1.6 a game with 7.5 games under his belt. I took that average and extrapolated that to the 7.5 games he didn't play. I made NO changes in this regard. No increase or decrease for ANY reason whatsoever. We know what he's thrown to this point and it's also reasonable to assign him 1.6 per game prior to when he Started.

Yards

This is the EASIEST of stats to analyze. He's only had ONE 300 yard game. Not great, but he's averaging 200 yards a game. So I assigned 200 yards for the prior games. x8 That's 1600 yards. He has 2k yards right now when rounded up. If he were below 1,750 I would have rounded down. This gives him an ATTAINABLE 3600 yards on to this point of the season.

Sacks

This is also an easy stat to figure out. I used the Sack stat that Hill has and put Alex in a similar situation. He's a bit more mobile so I allowed for that. He also has a quicker release and uses the snap count as well as his arm to get himself out or into trouble. This figured into the INT issue as well so it would be less Sacks taken.

Now I realize the science is lost on people. But the numbers DON'T lie. The numbers say this season Alex IS better than Rodgers.

But you have to be willing to suspend doubt long enough to look and see the theory.

My bad if I confused ya, but I did walk you through it step by step previously.

Think of this as a bit like Sabermetrics. They don't lie. And it's the clearest picture you're going to get short of Alex performing on the field right from the start of the season as he SHOULD have been.

~Ceadder

This is what I know best. Anytime someone must develop and produce a multi-step statistical anaylis to disprove the obvious, they have spent a lot of time typically proving nothing. Sorry bud, but this is not a measurement that is all that difficult to see. It's football and if you got it, you got it. If you don't, you don't.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by ttime1:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Wow really?

1st the Gibberish statement. Umm I admit it's not my best written work. But it sure as hell ain't gibberish.

Now for everyone else.

The numbers were come by honestly. I split his passing average in half on TDs' while giving him his average INT stat for the games that he did not play. This is a reliable formula. It's done ALL THE TIME people. I'm not the first nor will I be the last to put forth a theory based on known statistics.

We know what his average is at this point for every category.

Now realize that I am working backward here. Most people take a couple solid outings and extrapolate them through the rest of the season based on limited info.

I only did it in reverse.

Also I did not base it on just the Spread formation success. I used both Offenses when figuring the numbers.

TDs'

Like I said 2 TDs' a gamex8. He's thrown 3 TD games it's not unheard of for the man to put two scores on the board through the air. But also I dropped 8 for the Run game. So I halved his projected total. Even MORE doable.

INTs'

He's averaging 1.6 a game with 7.5 games under his belt. I took that average and extrapolated that to the 7.5 games he didn't play. I made NO changes in this regard. No increase or decrease for ANY reason whatsoever. We know what he's thrown to this point and it's also reasonable to assign him 1.6 per game prior to when he Started.

Yards

This is the EASIEST of stats to analyze. He's only had ONE 300 yard game. Not great, but he's averaging 200 yards a game. So I assigned 200 yards for the prior games. x8 That's 1600 yards. He has 2k yards right now when rounded up. If he were below 1,750 I would have rounded down. This gives him an ATTAINABLE 3600 yards on to this point of the season.

Sacks

This is also an easy stat to figure out. I used the Sack stat that Hill has and put Alex in a similar situation. He's a bit more mobile so I allowed for that. He also has a quicker release and uses the snap count as well as his arm to get himself out or into trouble. This figured into the INT issue as well so it would be less Sacks taken.

Now I realize the science is lost on people. But the numbers DON'T lie. The numbers say this season Alex IS better than Rodgers.

But you have to be willing to suspend doubt long enough to look and see the theory.

My bad if I confused ya, but I did walk you through it step by step previously.

Think of this as a bit like Sabermetrics. They don't lie. And it's the clearest picture you're going to get short of Alex performing on the field right from the start of the season as he SHOULD have been.

~Ceadder

This is what I know best. Anytime someone must develop and produce a multi-step statistical anaylis to disprove the obvious, they have spent a lot of time typically proving nothing. Sorry bud, but this is not a measurement that is all that difficult to see. It's football and if you got it, you got it. If you don't, you don't.

But that is exactly where you are wrong. Cause there has been multi step analysis for a VERY LONG time.

We use numbers to test theories all the time. We can't have gotten to the Moon if we didn't have these "multi step problems" to prove something that everyone knew was wrong. Just because MY application didn't work doesn't mean THE application formula is wrong.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Great thread. Full of cooked statistics and unprovable statements . . .

Really?

Cooked statistics and unprovable statements?

Let's see now.

Do you believe in Evolution and the Big Bang theory?

If you do, those are RIFE with said "Cooked Statistics and unprovable statements. Right? Right? C'mon now they MAY be correct but they are by the very definition that you set, unprovable.

But I digress.

Here is some more logic for you.

How many dropped TOUCHDOWNS did Smith throw including the 18 that he's ALREADY thrown in 7.5 games of actual play.

I'm talking right in the MITTS type of drops. I know of 6 in the last 4 games. Two of them were on drives where we scored anyway. So that's FOUR that should have been caught that Smith was NOT the reason for the miss.

That would be what ummmmm TWENTY TWO scores in 7.5 games of play? He's ALREADY matched his best statistical year in production.

It's not that big a leap to the numbers I got. I even showed step by step how I came about them. That's called SUPPORTING YOUR THEORY in the eyes of the scientific community.

But I guess where Smith is concerned it's cooked up stats because Smith could never have a 200 yard 3 score game.

~Ceadder