J Freeman is better than Luke Kuechley

[remydat]

Everything you just posted is wrong. Go back, read the thread, please (finally) answer.

Thanks

Yeah sure, this is not an argument. Telling me something is wrong without explaining how serves no purpose. If you don't have the desire to explain your point, I certainly have no desire to do it for you.

 

[Jailbreak]

And I can defend and explain PFF's grades with thoughts as well. I know their methodology for grading and I know that their grades are subject to oversight by coaches. I can make a subjective determination that the methodology makes sense and is acceptable to me just as you can make your subjective determination that it is not sufficient for you.

I do this every day. As a Director at my job, I also have different people making different subjective determinations about various things and it's my job as a Director to ensure those different people are doing things and thinking about things in a consistent way. So not sure why this idea confuses. It would be Special person for one person to grade all players as it's simply not feasible. So rational people simple develop a process or methodology and put checks and balances in place to ensure that process or methodology is carried out in a manner that is consistent.

If people applied your dumb logic of one person making all subjective determinations on various things, society would collapse because it's not a feasible way of doing anything. This would be like saying one person should judge all murder cases because juries and judges have different subjective opinions on the evidence.

Come on, remy. Everyone needs to think both subjectively and objectively. I understand some place more weight on statistics than others. I think performance hides from the stats, particularly at certain positions.

 

[remydat]

Come on, remy. Everyone needs to think both subjectively and objectively. I understand some place more weight on statistics than others. I think performance hides from the stats, particularly at certain positions.

Where do you see me disputing what you are saying? I am not suggesting the PFF stats are the end be all. They are simply one data point. It's others that are arguing that because they are subjective they hold no value which to me is just odd. If people can make subjective determinations of a players value on a message board, I see no reason to dismiss the subjective opinion of PFF simply because they publish their grades for public consumption.

 

[Jailbreak]

Not really arguing. Clearly this is somewhat subjective. I don't swallow stats whole and I'm not saying you do. Not a big deal to me.

 

[Mongo_76]

 

[iueyedoc]

Where do you see me disputing what you are saying? I am not suggesting the PFF stats are the end be all. They are simply one data point. It's others that are arguing that because they are subjective they hold no value which to me is just odd. If people can make subjective determinations of a players value on a message board, I see no reason to dismiss the subjective opinion of PFF simply because they publish their grades for public consumption.

I thought you were a numbers guy by education. But you use their subjective grades as hard stats. It's like you saying One Direction is ranked as the best band ever because your 12 year old niece and her friends all say they are the best ever. And they know cuz they listen to music all the time.

You then would argue that the data point that is your niece's blog stating "One Direction is #1 for reelz" against the Beatles leading 20 #1 hits and say they are just different stats that have equal value

statistics

1
: a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data

2
: a collection of quantitative data


Some guys opinion given a random numerical value is not quantitative it is qualitative and thus exempt from the definition of a statistic.

FFS I thought UNC was a highly thought of university, or did you go to the Julius Peppers UNC?

 

[remydat]

I thought you were a numbers guy by education. But you use their subjective grades as hard stats. It's like you saying One Direction is ranked as the best band ever because your 12 year old niece and her friends all say they are the best ever. And they know cuz they listen to music all the time.

You then would argue that the data point that is your niece's blog stating "One Direction is #1 for reelz" against the Beatles leading 20 #1 hits and say they are just different stats that have equal value

statistics

1
: a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data

2
: a collection of quantitative data


Some guys opinion given a random numerical value is not quantitative it is qualitative and thus exempt from the definition of a statistic.

FFS I thought UNC was a highly thought of university, or did you go to the Julius Peppers UNC?

Where have you seen me use their grades as hard stats? I have always stated their grades are subjective. I simply trust their subjective opinions a bit more than I trust random CCS poster's subjective opinions.

So your analogy is flawed because the comparison has never been about PFF vs hard stats. It's been PFF's subjective grade vs IUEYEDOC's subjective opinion. Case in point, I already responded to your OP based on my review of the hard stats and PFF.

Well I guess the question is what are we using to judge? Like who here has watched enough Carolina and Bears games in 2016 to be able to intelligently answer the question without relying on the fact that Kuechly obviously has the better rep.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/14938/luke-kuechly
http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/11533/jerrell-freeman

Even looking at traditional stats which are obviously terrible when it comes to judging LBs, I don't see anything here that would clearly indicate the better player. So not sure anyone here has any real mechanism to state clearly who is better without relying on reputation.

Where do you see me taking PFF as gospel? I'm saying I looked at the hard stats and didn't see anything that obviously put Luke on top and I don't watch Luke enough to claim PFF is wrong. Now if you are telling me that you watched enough of Luke's games to clearly say Luke is better than Freeman in 2016 then let me know. Otherwise, let's be honest here and say you just picked this comparison because you assumed people would say Luke is obviously better not because the 2016 hard stats support that fact. You subjective opinion is based not on hard stats but Luke's reputation in the NFL and maybe a handful of games you actually watched of his if that..

So the comparison isn't PFF vs hard stats because the hard stats don't prove who is better. The comparison is PFF vs IUEYEDOC assuming Luke is the better player because of his reputation. In that comparison you will generally lose because I don't know you, I don't know your process of evaluation, and so you are no better than a PFF intern. Except with the PFF intern, I know a professional coach actually reviewed his grades. Who the **** reviewed your opinion of Luke vs Freeman?

 

[iueyedoc]

Where have you seen me use their grades as hard stats? I have always stated their grades are subjective. I simply trust their subjective opinions a bit more than I trust random CCS poster's subjective opinions.

I am not suggesting the PFF stats are the end be all. They are simply one data point.

I can't have a serious discussion with someone that simply ignores things they state moments earlier and act like they never said/suggested such.

I'm out.

 

[remydat]

I can't have a serious discussion with someone that simply ignores things they state moments earlier and act like they never said/suggested such.

I'm out.

Holy shit, are you Special person? Here is the full quote.

Where do you see me disputing what you are saying? I am not suggesting the PFF stats are the end be all. They are simply one data point. It's others that are arguing that because they are subjective they hold no value which to me is just odd. If people can make subjective determinations of a players value on a message board, I see no reason to dismiss the subjective opinion of PFF simply because they publish their grades for public consumption.

I clearly say they are subjective so how am I claiming they are hard stats? Hard stats would imply there is no subjectivity and I admit in the same paragraph you quoted that they are in fact subjective.

And again, I looked at the hard stats and I see no basis to conclude Luke was better in 2016. We all know you have no basis to claim Luke is better other than reputation based on past year so now you are trying to ignore answering the question by feigning some righteous indignation about me claiming something is a hard stat despite me clearly saying it's subjective.

Ok dude. Next time just say, my argument is bullshit but so I'm out. At no point in this convo have I ever used PFF grades/stats as hard stats.

 

[DC]

Has anyone on the internet actually "learned" anything and repented? CCS needs to laugh more.

 

[FirstTimer]

Yeah sure, this is not an argument. Telling me something is wrong without explaining how serves no purpose. If you don't have the desire to explain your point, I certainly have no desire to do it for you.

I did. In the other thread. Repeatedly.

Go back and read it(again). You're avoiding the questions(still). Five months later. Do you need me to post a link or is your search function THAT broken?

 

[remydat]

I did. In the other thread. Repeatedly.

Go back and read it(again). You're avoiding the questions(still). Five months later. Do you need me to post a link or is your search function THAT broken?

No I need you to explain the relevance to this thread and explain yourself in this thread. I'm not going to do your leg work for you particularly when from my perspective I've already answered your question numerous times.

 

[FirstTimer]

No I need you to explain the relevance to this thread and explain yourself in this thread. I'm not going to do your leg work for you particularly when from my perspective I've already answered your question numerous times.

You have never answered the below questions. Please do so. Until you do I will not engage any other topic in this thread.

For what it's worth, it's been five months and I'm still waiting for remy to answer these questions about Amos....

What big plays has he prevented? How? When? He clearly doesn't create turnovers(1 in two years) he doesn't make disruptive plays(1 FF and 1 sack in two years) he made a lot of tackles behind an awful front 7 last year. He's terrible in coverage, hence his on and off benching.

What does Amos specifically do to make him adequate? How can you personally support PFF's numbers? What specifically have you seen from Amos that would say to you "yeah PFF is right?

Any "big play" Amos is a part of he's on the wrong end of. (Blaine Gabbert, etc) What big plays has he prevented?

So please...you say "And I can defend and explain PFF's grades with thoughts as well."..so please FINALLY do so.

 

[remydat]

These questions were answered long ago.

1. I don't know what big plays he prevented. I know that the Bears D didn't give up a lot of big passing plays relative to the rest of the NFL when he started and I am assuming he was a part of that because he had the best PFF grade in the secondary.

2. I don't watch Amos enough to dispute PFF's grade of him. I know he doesn't get turnovers but even the top guys get like 10 turnovers a year. I am not watching his other 600 or 700 snaps in enough detail to claim he's terrible.

So these questions have already been answered. You just keep pretending like they haven't. You guys act like PFF has Amos as some god of a safety. They don't. They have him as an average safety and I have no info to say that evaluation is way off. He doesnt get turnovers and that seems to be how most want to judge him.

Neither you or PFF know his exact role or play design so your opinion of Amos is no more valid than theirs. I don't know you or your process for evaluation or how many games you watch so not sure why you think I should value your opinion over others.

 

[FirstTimer]

2. I don't watch Amos enough to dispute PFF's grade of him. I know he doesn't get turnovers but even the top guys get like 10 turnovers a year. I am not watching his other 600 or 700 snaps in enough detail to claim he's terrible.

So ignorance is bliss when defending PFF. Got it.


"I agree with PFF...but have no idea why and can't defend it."

Good talk.

So you'll defend PFF saying Amos is adequate/average but can't offer any real insight of your own to defend that PFF is actually right.

What a joke/crock.

:aj:

Thanks for answering after five months and offering nothing interesting.

 

[remydat]

So ignorance is bliss when defending PFF. Got it.


"I agree with PFF...but have no idea why and can't defend it."

Good talk.

So you'll defend PFF saying Amos is adequate/average but can't offer any real insight of your own to defend that PFF is actually right.

What a joke/crock.

:aj:

Thanks for answering after five months and offering nothing interesting.

No I don't agree with PFF. I just don't disagree with them unless I have clear evidence to do so. I have no clear evidence with respect to Amos so I have no reason to disagree with their conclusion that he's adequate. If they had him as a top 5 safety then I would disagree with them because the traditional stats don't seem to support that. However, I see nothing that says he's god awful because again a S job is more than getting a turnover 10 out of 700 snaps.

So I disagree with the idea that you or anyone else has enough information to convincingly dispute what PFF thinks about Amos. You have a subjective opinion that appears to be backed up more based on reputation or an over emphasis on turnovers.

Just like IUEYEDOC has provided no real evidence for why Luke played better than Freeman in 2016. He's just relying on Luke's reputation being better.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

No I don't agree with PFF. I just don't disagree with them unless I have clear evidence to do so. I have no clear evidence with respect to Amos so I have no reason to disagree with their conclusion that he's adequate. If they had him as a top 5 safety then I would disagree with them because the traditional stats don't seem to support that. However, I see nothing that says he's god awful because again a S job is more than getting a turnover 10 out of 700 snaps.

So I disagree with the idea that you or anyone else has enough information to convincingly dispute what PFF thinks about Amos. You have a subjective opinion that appears to be backed up more based on reputation or an over emphasis on turnovers.

Just like IUEYEDOC has provided no real evidence for why Luke played better than Freeman in 2016. He's just relying on Luke's reputation being better.

A lot of people DO HAVE evidence that PFF has inconsistent at best grades of players.

I might have the wrong game in mind, but didn't Peyton Manning have a below average score for his 7 TD performance against the Ravens?

 

[bearmick]

I find it incredible that people can get into pages-long arguments about something as inane as football metrics.

 

[BearFanJohn]

I find it incredible that people can get into pages-long arguments about something as inane as football metrics.

Isn't the internet great?!?!

 

[gpphat]

Just like IUEYEDOC has provided no real evidence for why Luke played better than Freeman in 2016. He's just relying on Luke's reputation being better.

Kuechly in 10 games

71 solo tackles, 31 assists, 2 sacks, 1 Int, 1 FF...also take into account teams game plan for Kuechly and how to avoid him.

Freeman in 12 games

86 solo tackles, 24 assists, 0 sacks, 0 Int, 0 FF

Freeman had a good season, not taking that away...but a healthy Kuechly was having a bigger impact on the field than a healthy Freeman.