Dak's complete regular-season and postseason record broken down

[Coogiguy03]

Post of the day.

Hey hey that sounds familiar

 

[amame25]

So let's see in general when he plays losing teams throws more than one touchdown doesn't get sacked doesn't turn the ball over runs between one and five times
Doesn't throw any interceptions. Complete 65% of his passes

He wins a lot of games.

Wow why do I get the feeling that's the same for a lot of quarterbacks

And therein lies the rub. I'm in no ways a Dak homer nor a Dak hater and still believe Romo was the head and shoulders better QB but stats without comparison offer nothing except what the reader wants to see.

 

[amame25]

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics. I particularly don't trust them because of the empty calorie stats Dak racks up in games. As you said, the better teams outside our division tend to have their way with Dakota. And in the playoffs he absolutely sucks.

Do you have anything to back up the empty stats or just believe that due to perceived lack of success?

 

[amame25]

Only stat I am wanting is playoff wins.

If only football wasn't an individual game.

 

[amame25]

All QBs who don't leave the game or give up acquire them. But those other QBs have real results to compensate. When you bring up postseason or success against our archnemesis teams like SF, Dak's supporters like you rely on stats WITHOUT CONTEXT. When you consider WHEN Dak racked up stats - in losses, in the 4th quarter after starting slow or freezing early in the game - then they are "empty calorie".

Something tells me you know this but believe only Dak is criticized for empty calorie stats. Well, Lamar Jackson may have tons of stats and MVPs, but he ALSO beats Mahomes, Allen and Burrow in the regular season. Yes, he has struggled in the postseason...which is why he is an elite choker. Dak is just a bargain basement choker with empty calorie stats.

Do you have anything to back up those stats compared to others or is this a "my eyes saw it so it must be true"

 

[amame25]

That's the issue, right? Most of the time there is no rigor just bias and a righteous interpretation of numbers without caveats or context.

Stats are the only non deniable while eyes are full of confirmation biases.

 

[OGSixshooter]

Do you have anything to back up those stats compared to others or is this a "my eyes saw it so it must be true"

You must need attention. The distinction with a difference was outlined in my post. If you missed it, maybe this is not the thread for you.

 

[noshame]

Pressure = fold
Scrambling = injury
But we knew that
Over and over.

 

[OGSixshooter]

Do you have anything to back up the empty stats or just believe that due to perceived lack of success?

not "perceived". Lack of success is the only "stat" that matters...and completely makes my point. You could have saved yourself the keystrokes and the embarrassment.

 

[OGSixshooter]

If only football wasn't an individual game.

If only stans didn't want to rely on garbage time stats to justify individual awards and bloated contracts.

 

[OGSixshooter]

We do not need countless deep dives into stats for what our eyes already tell us.

In a bottom line sport, statistics are spin. Take a boxing match. It's a zero sum sport...for the most part. You can bang on about power punches, landed punches, punches thrown, but in the end...there are DOZENS of variables that we are assessing as humans that don't make the stat sheet - aka the "eye test". If there is no clear "winner" - knockout - even then we can generally assess who won the fight. The eye test DOES contain bias but so do incomplete assessments based on stats with no context, targets or boundaries.

So while we all enjoy the stats of football, it's not baseball. It's a gladatorial sport where WINNING MATTERS...and the eye test tells us that when we need Dak the most he does not play WINNING FOOTBALL.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

I once heard that long, long ago people used to have to make a phone call to verify what the current time was.

"Time and Temperature"

We also had to wait for theparty line to free up.

Nope....that's a DIFFERENT "Party Line".

 

[jazzcat22]

If only football wasn't an individual game.

Right. Stats are fun. Especially if you are winning.

In the 90's I alway kept track of the Triplets numbers. To see where they ranked with the top players.
Of course Troy was never going to be a top QB in stats. Michael same for WR's. But both were up there.
All because Enmity was at the top at RB. Or near the top.

Now I do not look at all of that too much, not since those 3 retired. Except Zeke somewhat.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

If only football wasn't an individual game.

Nobody said it was.

The same people that scream "It's a team game" also celebrate Daks All-Pros.

 

[jazzcat22]

In a bottom line sport, statistics are spin. Take a boxing match. It's a zero sum sport...for the most part. You can bang on about power punches, landed punches, punches thrown, but in the end...there are DOZENS of variables that we are assessing as humans that don't make the stat sheet - aka the "eye test". If there is no clear "winner" - knockout - even then we can generally assess who won the fight. The eye test DOES contain bias but so do incomplete assessments based on stats with no context, targets or boundaries.

So while we all enjoy the stats of football, it's not baseball. It's a gladatorial sport where WINNING MATTERS...and the eye test tells us that when we need Dak the most he does not play WINNING FOOTBALL.

So football is a team sport. But when Dallas loses, it is all Dak's fault?
The hate is real.

 

[jazzcat22]

Nobody said it was.

The same people that scream "It's a team game" also celebrate Daks All-Pros.

They also blame all the losses on Dak, but never give him credit for a win.

 

[OGSixshooter]

So football is a team sport. But when Dallas loses, it is all Dak's fault?
The hate is real.

Is that what you got from my post? The bias and condescension is real lol.

If you see that post as hate, you're too emotional and attached to be reasoned with.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Right. Stats are fun. Especially if you are winning.

In the 90's I alway kept track of the Triplets numbers. To see where they ranked with the top players.
Of course Troy was never going to be a top QB in stats. Michael same for WR's. But both were up there.
All because Enmity was at the top at RB. Or near the top.

Now I do not look at all of that too much, not since those 3 retired. Except Zeke somewhat.

Right? Stats CAN be fun. Why else do we keep 'em?


And if chosen correctly, can be used to bludgeon others with opinion.

Nothign wrong with 'em...when used with some context and a conclusion if needed.

 

[jazzcat22]

Is that what you got from my post? The bias and condescension is real lol.

If you see that post as hate, you're too emotional and attached to be reasoned with.

I have ZERO emotional attachment. All I see is from my EYE TEST on many post. Is some always talk down Dak, regardless of the subject.

 

[diamonddelts]

Stats are for people looking for something other than wins.