Stats Dak vs Wentz

Future · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
Just to keep tabs, you’re the same guy that:

Still thinks 55 is 150% of 37

You’re “winning” luuulz.

What, this again? It is. Well, 55.5 is, but whatever.

37x1.5

Northern_Cowboy · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
That's a false comparison, its like saying one guy got hurt in a boxing match while the other got hurt in a yoga class.

The 1989 team was the worst team in the league with a horrible OL, Aikman took a pounding on every series. There was a lot of speculation Aikman wouldn't recover, similar to what happened to David Carr in Houston. 1989 was long before the rules changed to protect QBs from taking hits, defenders could take a running start to crush the QB and often did. Wentz played in an era were Randy Gregory was flagged for roughing the passer because he pulled Wentz down by his thighs.

Wentz was playing behind an OL with multiple Pro Bowl players and had a lot less rushing plays than Prescott. Prescott has also been injured in games repeatedly where he didn't leave the game.

Wasn't the worst team in year 2 or 3 infact they made the playoffs in year three, Aikman still missed many games his first 3 seasons

1-15 -1st year
7-9 - 2nd year
11-5 - 3rd year

HungryLion · May 20, 2019

Aerolithe_Lion said:
what im saying is most qbs improve dramatically from their rookie year. Favre was awful, steve young was awful, aaron rodgers was substandard the first year he started. Using rookie year to determine who's better 4 years down the road doesnt really make sense.

Dak has had better stats cumulatively because of his rookie year, sure. But that has no bearing how he is as a qb today.

That’s true. The rookie season doesn’t.

Then again, if we are talking about most recent performance. Dak was playing at a very high level the last half of the season and playoffs.

If he continues to play at that level or improves from there, then the team will be in good shape. Dak was playing really well overall the last 10 games he has played in.

Dak’s performance has taken an uneven trajectory, as opposed to Wentz which has been a more even trajectory.

But if we are going based off RIGHT NOW they are also still pretty even. As Dak’s stats the last 10
Games are so are probably very close to Carson’s I would imagine. I don’t know for sure but I am estimating.

Northern_Cowboy · May 20, 2019

viman96 said:
With Troy you have the benefit of hindsight which the Eagles do not. Right now the only thing anyone can know for sure, Wentz gets hurt a lot and going to back to College has not finished the season 4 consecutive years.

Hindsight is not relevant here the comparison is strickly to games missed and Aikman missed his fair share his 1st 3 seasons, same as Wentz

Future · May 20, 2019

DakPresgoat said:
That’s true. The rookie season doesn’t.

Then again, if we are talking about most recent performance. Dak was playing at a very high level the last half of the season and playoffs.

If he continues to play at that level or improves from there, then the team will be in good shape. Dak was playing really well overall the last 10 games he has played in.

Dak’s performance has taken an uneven trajectory, as opposed to Wentz which has been a more even trajectory.

But if we are going based off RIGHT NOW they are also still pretty even. As Dak’s stats the last 10
Games are so are probably very close to Carson’s I would imagine. I don’t know for sure but I am estimating.

I agree that Dak and Wentz aren't that far apart (though, as a passer, I don't really think it's close), but you're badly overstating Dak's last 10 games. There were some big plays that nullified poor performance (i.e. Philly, Atlanta), but other than the Giants game week 17, he was pretty pedestrian. Better than the back half of 2017 and pre-Amari 2018, but that's a really low bar.

Too often, talking about Dak, the context of what offenses around the league are doing gets lost. Some of Dallas' performances down the stretch were abysmal (TEN, ATL, NO, Indy, LAR). Even though the scheme/coaching gets some of the blame, you can't separate that from the QB.

Kaiser · May 20, 2019

Northern_Cowboy said:
Wasn't the worst team in year 2 or 3 infact they made the playoffs in year three, Aikman still missed many games his first 3 seasons

That was a completely different era. If Aikman played under the "put a dress on the QB" rules he never would have missed a snap.

Future · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
That was a completely different era. If Aikman played under the "put a dress on the QB" rules he never would have missed a snap.

Pretty much.

He'd also be throwing for 5,000 yards.

Northern_Cowboy · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
That was a completely different era. If Aikman played under the "put a dress on the QB" rules he never would have missed a snap.

Ya whatever because players don't hit as hard today...lol and aren't way bigger now than they were 30 years ago

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
That was a completely different era. If Aikman played under the "put a dress on the QB" rules he never would have missed a snap.

never say never. because of the rule changes, players have to tackle differently and make it almost unnatural. In turn it brings its own set of problems and injuries. Since he is part of this topic, Wentz's injury was a freak accident and no amount of rules could have changed it. The NFL is turning into helicopter Moms which we have seen can do more damage then good. just ask any kid from 60s, 70s and 80s We are still breathing

Aerolithe_Lion · May 20, 2019

DakPresgoat said:
That’s true. The rookie season doesn’t.

Then again, if we are talking about most recent performance. Dak was playing at a very high level the last half of the season and playoffs.

If he continues to play at that level or improves from there, then the team will be in good shape. Dak was playing really well overall the last 10 games he has played in.

Dak’s performance has taken an uneven trajectory, as opposed to Wentz which has been a more even trajectory.

But if we are going based off RIGHT NOW they are also still pretty even. As Dak’s stats the last 10
Games are so are probably very close to Carson’s I would imagine. I don’t know for sure but I am estimating.

Dak Last 10 (mostly with Amari): 70% completion, 7.7 ypa, 20 combined TDs, 2800 combined yards. only 4 ints but took 37 sacks
Carson Last 10 (All 2018 comeback season): 70% completion, 7.7 ypa, 20 combined TDs, 2900 combined yards, 7 ints but took only 26 sacks

Last year, Carson lost both his 2017 deep threat Torrey Smith to the Panthers, and his 2018 deep threat Mike Wallace to season ending injury before the season. This year he'll have Desean Jackson, who's 32 but still the reigning yards per catch leader in the whole league. He'll also have a run game, which was the main thing missing from the 2017 season. That will dramatically affect his proficiency.

Dak will have Amari for 16 games.

Yet one is so much better with so much more upside to Cowboys fans. The injury can be used indefinitely to complain about Carson, but 'lack of talent' just doesn't make sense.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

Northern_Cowboy said:
Ya whatever because players don't hit as hard today...lol and aren't way bigger now than they were 30 years ago

fact is they hit harder and are stronger. Hence why we see more ACL/ MCL injuries. These guys are pushing the human body to the limit. Now there is also more science involved as well. It really would be cool to see a 90s Eagles / Cowboys team play Todays Rules and Today's teams play theirs. Hell would be cool if we could see how they did against each other. Im sure some brainiac guy could come up with an algorithm to computer generate something close.

Kaiser · May 20, 2019

Northern_Cowboy said:
Ya whatever because players don't hit as hard today...lol and aren't way bigger now than they were 30 years ago

However big they are, they aren't allowed to put their body weight on a QB or hit the QB after more than 2 steps. You clearly didn't watch the games back in Aikman's era.

Northern_Cowboy · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
However big they are, they aren't allowed to put their body weight on a QB or hit the QB after more than 2 steps. You clearly didn't watch the games back in Aikman's era.

Of course i did and that rule you mentioned is 1 year old not 10 or 15 years and it doesn't say you can't hit hard it says you can't "drive " the QB into the ground

Kaiser · May 20, 2019

Northern_Cowboy said:
Of course i did and that rule you mentioned is 1 year old not 10 or 15 years and it doesn't say you can't hit hard it says you can't "drive " the QB into the ground

Read Article 9 of the actual rulebook -

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2018-nfl-rulebook/#penalty-summary

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Future said:
What, this again? It is. Well, 55.5 is, but whatever.

37x1.5

We already went through this and I even posted the links (and post #s).

“Cowboy have almost 150% more Rushing TDs from 2016 to 2018”:
https://cowboyszone.com/threads/goff-vs-prescott.428409/page-13#post-9026994

“150% more [...]” speaks to the percentage increase from a given number which in this case is 37. The percentage change from 37 to 55 is 48.65%.

As in “The Cowboys have scored almost 48.66% more rushing TDs (than the Eagles) from 2016-2018.”

This is math, not football opinions.

xwalker is too intellectually dishonest to admit to it.

Kaiser is simply ignorant.

Future · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
We already went through this and I even posted the links (and post #s).

“Cowboy have almost 150% more Rushing TDs from 2016 to 2018”:
https://cowboyszone.com/threads/goff-vs-prescott.428409/page-13#post-9026994

What’s comical is he thinks my description error somehow trumps his documented actual mathematical error.

I guess if you don’t grasp basic arithmetic ignorance becomes bliss.

150% more isn't what you said originally in this thread.

Still thinks 55 is 150% of 37

150% of and 150% more aren't the same thing.

55 is 150% of 37.
55 is not 150% more than 37.

Don't give me the nonsense of arithmetic ignorance, because you're saying two different things. I don't remember where it came from, it was pointless to bring up again.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
Read Article 9 of the actual rulebook -

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2018-nfl-rulebook/#penalty-summary

? maybe copy and past what you think you are reading since you cant direct us properly?

ARTICLE 9. ALTERNATE DATES, SITES
In instances under these emergency procedures which require the Commissioner to reschedule a regular-season game, the Commissioner will make every effort to set the game for no later than two days after its originally scheduled date, and he will attempt to schedule the game at its original site. If unable to do so, the Commissioner will schedule it at the nearest available facility. If it is impossible to schedule the game within two days after its original date, the Commissioner will attempt to schedule it on the Tuesday of the next calendar week in which the two involved clubs play other clubs (or each other). Further, the Commissioner will keep in mind the potential for competitive inequities if one or both of the involved clubs has already been scheduled for a game following the Tuesday of that week (e.g., Thanksgiving).

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Future said:
150% more isn't what you said originally in this thread.

Still thinks 55 is 150% of 37

150% of and 150% more aren't the same thing.

55 is 150% of 37.
55 is not 150% more than 37.

Don't give me the nonsense of arithmetic ignorance, because you're saying two different things. I don't remember where it came from, it was pointless to bring up again.

So what’s your point?

My description error somehow trumps the actual mathematical error?

I just posted the original link.

There’s no mistaking the actual claim.

blueblood70 · May 20, 2019

Aerolithe_Lion said:
what im saying is most qbs improve dramatically from their rookie year. Favre was awful, steve young was awful, aaron rodgers was substandard the first year he started. Using rookie year to determine who's better 4 years down the road doesnt really make sense.

Dak has had better stats cumulatively because of his rookie year, sure. But that has no bearing how he is as a qb today.

LMAO keep thinking that but from day one throw one, snap one you keep those stats for life and you are discounting Daks Rookie year and asking us to do so for Wentz just because he wasn't good..lmao bro..Dak should get credit for being BETTER his rookie year and so far hes been available and head to head having as good career as player who was picked 3 rounds higher and many draft picks giving up to go get him that was on the bench while his backup one the ring..

) im supposed to commend him for that while discounting daks early success? its hard as rookie isnt it yet 4th round QB blew a 1st rounder off the final the first year..think hard about that..how wentz do in last years playoffs? oh right he held an Ipad for foles..

)

QuincyCarterEra · May 20, 2019

Future said:
150% more isn't what you said originally in this thread.

Still thinks 55 is 150% of 37

150% of and 150% more aren't the same thing.

55 is 150% of 37.
55 is not 150% more than 37.

Don't give me the nonsense of arithmetic ignorance, because you're saying two different things. I don't remember where it came from, it was pointless to bring up again.

Just move on. He's not worth anyone's time.

Doesnt know elementary math or football

Stats Dak vs Wentz

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member