There are 174 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Cole: A stat that indicates the 49ers wont win the SB

Stat - Steve Deberg had more than triple the pro stats before he was replaced by a third round draft pick.

His name was Joe Montana.

No stats.
Originally posted by spraked:
I have to to disagree. TO are a product of play. Yes there is luck involved but there is more skill. I aquatint it to poker. Yes luck is there but the same guys keep winning and to a point they can live off of it. Football is a team sport therefore a slight change in team will effect the results. Pass rush goes down a bit and you no longer get ints. coverage gets worse in one spot not as many sack/sack fumble. Coach changes strategy and the whole thing can go to hell. Which is enough to throw of stats. Also you are using differential which brings the offense into the picture. Offense starts turn the ball over more, d stays the same ratio is worse.

TO is based on skill and coaching. Your stat can be thrown of by to many factors.

Poker seems like a pretty good analogy for producing turnovers. A balance of luck and skill, and on any given play it might be 99% skill and 1% luck, or vice versa.

But while coaches are no doubt trying to coach their players to produce them, the truth is that turnover performance never seems to be repeatable. There are a lot of possible reasons for this. But whatever the reason you pick, the simple truth is that a team that forces tons of turnovers over any given period is not more likely than anyone else to sustain it.
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
TOs happen because we have p52 and Bowman tackling not only the ballcarrier but the ball. Your watch and see more and more guys tearing at the ball more often. TOs happen because we play tight coverage and lots of balls get tipped, or just rudely intercepted. TOs happen because our DL/ front 7 have been meaner, smarter, more aggressive, ball rippers and sackers than the offensives they played against. Alex's INT ratio is going to go up because of statistics? Why should they if he continues to get good protection, is way smarter at handling QB than in previous yrs with an OC, HC, Qb coach to coach him...intimately, slowly, and trustingly. If he has more INTs, a good bet would be receivers running bad routes, dropping balls, guys missing blocks, etc. This team has been coached up against that kind of thing. What do stats have to do with any of the above germane issues. From my perspective we will continue to get more TOs, alex's INTs will continue to stay low, our front 7 are going to beat most teams OL, our secondary while not stellar, is 80% better than last yr, and continues to improve, plus it is cohesive and has a purpose. Those are the things I look at to see how we are going to do in the remainder of the season. Playing a Thurs niter after going across country....now there is something to screw up a team, giving them the equivalent of 1 and 1/2 days to prepare and practice in 3 time zones difference. And none of those issues has anything to do with stats. How about our D is way more aggressive than ever, our O while not really having spent much time together under Harbaugh is cooking on all cylinders. Now those are things to predict how what our future holds.

It's pretty simple really. Alex is throwing picks at about a 1.4% rate (this has gone up recently, it was actually below 1% for a while). No QB in the NFL, ever, had sustained a rate below 2% for more than about a season. There is some luck to avoiding interceptions. Alex is playing well and also getting lucky. Being both good and lucky at the same time is possible, you know.
What's up with the niners lack of 3rd down conversion ? After another dreadful performance against Baltimore, is this team really going to compete
with the elite teams if they can't keep the chains moving????? Third conversions comes down to play calling, o-line protection and the quarterback,
so which is hurting the niners the most? Is the lack of third conversions a sign of what's to come during the playoffs when your facing elite quarterbacks.....
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,825
how about having the 29th ranked passing offense in the NFL?
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,825
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.
Originally posted by WeAreLegend:
Stat - Steve Deberg had more than triple the pro stats before he was replaced by a third round draft pick.

His name was Joe Montana.

No stats.

lol yeah, but most new QB replace guys who have had full careers already. bad example...
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.

the point isnt really who said it, but the quote itself.
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.

It's true no matter who says it.
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,825
Originally posted by WeAreLegend:
Stat - Steve Deberg had more than triple the pro stats before he was replaced by a third round draft pick.

His name was Joe Montana.

No stats.

lamest analogy I've ever read in the WZ, sorry. I'm not even sure what your point is. hundreds of players get replaced every year by younger players. Some do worse, some do better. some do way worse, some do way better. randomly picking one particular cirumstance and trying to extrapolate that therefore stats don't matter is pretty statistically irresponsible....
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,825
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.

It's true no matter who says it.

seriously? I can't believe I'm reading that people think stats don't matter. next you'll say that the players and coaches shouldn't watch game tape or practice either, because all that matters is winning. What a ridiculous assertion. I don't even know where to start in responding to it. The NFL is the most statistically analyzed business in the world (that is not an exaggeration), because the stats matter.
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.

It's true no matter who says it.

seriously? I can't believe I'm reading that people think stats don't matter. next you'll say that the players and coaches shouldn't watch game tape or practice either, because all that matters is winning. What a ridiculous assertion. I don't even know where to start in responding to it. The NFL is the most statistically analyzed business in the world (that is not an exaggeration), because the stats matter.

How do you explain 9 wins and 2 losses if our stats are so horrible. There's a reason you and posters like yourself only show up with your Swiss cheese stat lines only after we lose. Winning is all that matters. Ask the Panthers fans how much offensive stats matter.
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by Niners99:
to quote Raheem Morris: "stats are for losers. so you keep looking at stats, we'll keep looking at wins."

this definitely applies to stats like that.

I would be impressed if Vince Lombardi said that. Raheem Morris is underperforming this year, so he's not exactly the best person to dish out the success model for winning.

It's true no matter who says it.

seriously? I can't believe I'm reading that people think stats don't matter. next you'll say that the players and coaches shouldn't watch game tape or practice either, because all that matters is winning. What a ridiculous assertion. I don't even know where to start in responding to it. The NFL is the most statistically analyzed business in the world (that is not an exaggeration), because the stats matter.

some stats matter, but they arent that important when it comes to winning. its cool to see where you rank among other teams statistically, but unless the NFL's statistically best team beats a middle of the pack statistical team 100% of the time, stats are just stats. If you win 12 games, youre a 12 win team, regardless of stats.

the NFL is heavily over analyzed, and its not because stats matter, its because its a multi-billion dollar business. If people will watch it, theyll keep analyzing it. success in the NFL is about who dominates the OL and DL. if you protect the QB and rush the passer, youre going to win. its not about numbers.
ESPN Sportsnation current poll: Do you consider the 49ers to be legitimate Super Bowl Contenders?

Over 6,500 votes so far

52% yes
48% no