Give Props to Brunell

[BrunellMVP?]

Originally Posted by dmek25

thats all that should matter to ant redskin fan. there are no so called style points

agreed. We are 3-5.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by illdefined

Tripp, it's been explained ad infinitum. it's YAC - that's a stat, so start doing some serious subtraction. maybe if Distance Thrown was a stat, you would pay attention. maybe if stats only applied when In Contention (and not garbage time) you would stop basing Brunell's HOF application based on his 'stellar' numbers.

beware the number crunchers.

not only that, when i looked at the deep throw chart TAFKAS threw up, guys like peyton threw 50% more deep passes and completed 50% more as well as having a lower int % on deep balls. if you go through the play by plays, they keep track of deep passes and shorter passes that go for big gains.

sometimes it seems like GTripp doesn't even bother watching the games, and just looks at the stat lines instead.

and GT, you're arguement that the lack of possessions is what's making the offense look bad is crap. brunell has more attempts this year (in 8 games) than he had in 9 in 2004 (with a great defense), and he's on track to have more than he had in 2005 (with a good defense), and he'll be sacked less too.

and before you project out how this year's stats will be better than last years - they won't. brunell fades down the stretch, and when we started winning last year, it was in part because we took the ball out of his hands and ran it more...


first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14

and no shit it's somewhat self-serving, but that doesn't seem to bother you (that whole correlation != causation thing).

[Cheerful1]

Poor Brunell! lol .... ya gotta love him!
It's humorous to watch when he tries to "run the ball." He's the only player I know who looks as if he's running a marathon yet, only ends up moving .00012of a yard.
Why can't they make an exception and allow Mark the right's to a motorized scooter? lol

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by rotahe39

Brunell did his job - plain and simple. Didn't play outstanding but better than past weeks.

Key is that we won, that's all that matters to me.

Ever heard the saying "It's not always whether you win or loose, it's how you play the game" We won (seems like everybody's happy, including me) The coaches are not happy with the way we played the game.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

Ever heard the saying "It's not always whether you win or loose, it's how you play the game" We won (seems like everybody's happy, including me) The coaches are not happy with the way we played the game.

Coaches at any level are Never happy with the game.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Coaches at any level are Never happy with the game.

Which means there's a lot of work left to be done, and a short time to do it.

[Hog1]

True. I was lookig at our D standings (in some thread). Holy shit, what the hell happened? I mean, yah, we have some injuries.................but we are like last or close in several major categories. I am not a real stat geek as it does not encompass much of what it takes to win,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but HELL

[rotahe39]

Originally Posted by That Guy

first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14
.

Interesting stat i like it

[steveo395]

Originally Posted by That Guy

not only that, when i looked at the deep throw chart TAFKAS threw up, guys like peyton threw 50% more deep passes and completed 50% more as well as having a lower int % on deep balls. if you go through the play by plays, they keep track of deep passes and shorter passes that go for big gains.

sometimes it seems like GTripp doesn't even bother watching the games, and just looks at the stat lines instead.

and GT, you're arguement that the lack of possessions is what's making the offense look bad is crap. brunell has more attempts this year (in 8 games) than he had in 9 in 2004 (with a great defense), and he's on track to have more than he had in 2005 (with a good defense), and he'll be sacked less too.

and before you project out how this year's stats will be better than last years - they won't. brunell fades down the stretch, and when we started winning last year, it was in part because we took the ball out of his hands and ran it more...


first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14

and no shit it's somewhat self-serving, but that doesn't seem to bother you (that whole correlation != causation thing).

the running game also got a lot better at the end of the year

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by That Guy

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14

Honestly I'm not sure how much information you can derive from that stat. It's kind of stating the obvious.

When teams are losing (and therefore more likely to lose the game) they pass more. When a team is winning (and therefore more likely to win the game) they run more.

If you averaged all the games played by all the teams in the past 10 years, you'd find a similar stat.

Not trying to be a naysayer, just thought I'd make that point. It really doesn't say anything about Brunell in particular, just that we pass more when we're down, and we usually lose games in which we were down.

[That Guy]

right, and you throw more when you're behind, which doesn't happen when you're running and playing good defense. that's what the disclaimer is there for, but it's just showing that stats are a bit misleading on their own, since correlation == causation seems to be how the defense of brunell has been argued here, and it's just not logically sound when you can see the quality of the in game performances compared to the stat lines.

but it's still somewhat interesting how less is more, even before the end of the year, with regards to brunell.

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by That Guy

right, and you throw more when you're behind, which doesn't happen when you're running and playing good defense. that's what the disclaimer is there for, but it's just showing that stats are a bit misleading on their own, since correlation == causation seems to be how the defense of brunell has been argued here, and it's just not logically sound when you can see the quality of the in game performances compared to the stat lines.

but it's still somewhat interesting how less is more, even before the end of the year, with regards to brunell.

I agree with you about the stat line. I'm not one to jump on that bandwagon and I don't usually defend Brunell with stats, and when I do a disclaimer is attached. I just think we all need to back off Brunell this week, because IMO he's our best chance to win one game at a time.

I think we'll win the majority of our games when utilizing our running game to its max. potential. Look at how effective the play-action was against a very good cowboy defense. It just goes without saying the impact Portis and co. has on this team, both in the running and passing game.

[That Guy]

yeah, our run blocking has to be better than it was vs dallas though. 1 yard here, 2 yards there. I mean, portis made a couple wrong cuts, but the OL (and pulling guards) blocked the wrong guy a lot of times from re-watching the game.

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by That Guy

yeah, our run blocking has to be better than it was vs dallas though. 1 yard here, 2 yards there. I mean, portis made a couple wrong cuts, but the OL (and pulling guards) blocked the wrong guy a lot of times from re-watching the game.

Totally agree, but at least it keeps the defense loyal to the run, and thus opening up some play action.

When saunders was just busting pass pass pass out of his rear end, kind of made little/no sense... you set the pass up w/ the run, not vice versa.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

I think the assumption that he doesn't throw deep has some legitimacy towards it. I think it was my homie tafkas that released the deep ball spread sheet, I'll look for it in a second.

He is however looking better as of late. That extra weak of rest definitly helped him out. He doesn't play well injured ever, and I think he's looking pretty sharp now.

Theres a difference between not throwing deep and not throwing deep as often as so and so. If you make a comparison, then you may have a point. But if you say "doesn't throw deep", then all I have to do is show one example and said person is wrong.

It's nitpicky I know, but if you use qualifiers and comparisions, we have a discussion. If you don't, I use stats...and then we have whiny baseless rebuttles.

I hate to be stingy like this (I really do), but if people don't back up their posts with evidence, they shouldn't be able to dismiss stats.

Remember, I don't think the way I do because of the stats, I only use them to reinforce my opinion.