Stats Dak vs Wentz

HungryLion · May 20, 2019

Future said:
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.

Every QB is impacted by big games and some bad games.

Irregardless. My overall point is. When looking at trajectories, Dak ended the season on a high note and has been improving.

He really had a bad slump the second half of 2017 and first half of 2018. But it’s not true his game has been sliding consistently since his rookie season.

HungryLion · May 20, 2019

Aerolithe_Lion said:
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.

Right so Dak and Carson’s performances were almost identical. Dak having a better running game to help him, and even with the loss of Torrey Smith. I would still say the eagles had a better overall receiving group (te/wr) than the cowboys did after the Cooper trade.

I don’t think Dak has much more upside. That’s silly for anybody who says that. I do think thus far they are both playing at similar overall levels (albeit different strengths and weaknesses). They are also both young players who are still growing.

Regardless, I personally think both QB’s are good enough to win with and have the ability to still improve. If they have the right teams around them.

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

QuincyCarterEra said:
Just move on. He's not worth anyone's time.

Doesnt know elementary math or football

Lool, the sincere stupidity of you claiming I don’t know math when you think 55 is almost 150% than 37.

A 5-year old could look at that math problem on its face and tell you that’s bunk.

I know you’re doing the best you can.

QuincyCarterEra · May 20, 2019

Here's what you need to know:

Wentz has been a less productive passer than Dak
Wentz has been a less productive runner than Dak
Wentz has been more turnover prone than Dak
Wentz has been more injury prone than Dak
Wentz has been a less productive passer and runner than Dak despite having a better average supporting cast over the last three years than Dak
Wentz has been a less productive passer and runner than Dak despite having better coaching over the last three years
Wentz has been so so so so so so so much worse in high pressure situations than Dak

Wentz has been less prone to sacks than Dak

Hope that clears up everything

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
Lool, the sincere stupidity of you claiming I don’t know math when you think 55 is almost 150% than 37.

A 5-year old could look at that math problem on its face and tell you that’s bunk.

I know you’re doing the best you can.

Maybe maybe not .... that common core crap they are teaching youths today. Then add in more districts using the no child left behind crap too. Hell my oldest got in trouble arguing with a teacher. Teacher told her students you wont always have a calculator available or carry one with you. My kid said, is your salary that bad you still dont have a smartphone?

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Birdgang said:
Maybe maybe not .... that common core crap they are teaching youths today. Then add in more districts using the no child left behind crap too. Hell my oldest got in trouble arguing with a teacher. Teacher told her students you wont always have a calculator available or carry one with you. My kid said, is your salary that bad you still dont have a smartphone?

Lol, these guys aren’t our best and brightest.

There’s nothing more comical than someone arguing basic math concepts like it’s open for interpretation.

“57 is almost 150% more than 37.......heeeeehaaaw.....heeehaaaaw! You don’t know math!”

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
Lol, these guys aren’t our best and brightest.

There’s nothing more comical than someone arguing basic math concepts like it’s open for interpretation.

“57 is almost 150% more than 37.......heeeeehaaaw.....heeehaaaaw! You don’t know math!”

sad thing is not knowing the basics, a calculator will be a struggle

Blue&Silver · May 20, 2019

PA Cowboy Fan said:
I wanted us to draft Wentz and I'm not totally sold on Dak but thus far Dak has had the better career. All this talk about Wentz is based on what people think he will do. If he can't stay healthy none of it matters.

His injuries are way overblown. He had 3 injuries 2 of which under regular circumstances he would not have missed any time. He's played some 28 straight games, and hadn't missed that many overall there's plenty to make a judgment on.

I'm not complaining about Prescott in fact I love him, and what he's achieved. I've watched them both in college, and now in the pros. When their careers are said and done I just don't think they will be comparable. As for Prescott I hope the magic continues.

Kaiser · May 20, 2019

QuincyCarterEra said:
Just move on. He's not worth anyone's time.

Doesnt know elementary math or football

This is the 3rd or 4th time he has posted that - and been called on it - and he just now realized his mistake. And his whole schtick is claiming to be smart.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

QuincyCarterEra said:
Just move on. He's not worth anyone's time.

Doesnt know elementary math or football

I think people are getting lost in the wording yet all sides are saying same thing. It reminds me of my kids fighting while saying trying to prove same point ... just saying it differently but meaning the same thing.

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
This is the 3rd or 4th time he has posted that - and been called on it - and he just now realized his mistake. And his whole schtick is claiming to be smart.

Oh no, you've exposed me...

If only I could point to a thread where xwalker's actual bunk claim was made and you lemmings ignorantly followed suit?!?!?

Oh yeah....there is:

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/goff-vs-prescott.428409/page-13#post-9026994

lulz.

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Birdgang said:
I think people are getting lost in the wording yet all sides are saying same thing. It reminds me of my kids fighting while saying trying to prove same point ... just saying it differently but meaning the same thing.

We're not saying the same thing at all. They just aren't bright enough to figure it out.

Here's a simple math problem they can't seem to figure out:

Joe Blow makes $37 an hour, while Jane Doe makes $55. How much more (in terms of percentage) does Jane Doe make than Joe Blow?

[I'll give you one hint....55 is not 150% more than 37]

Here's what xwalker actually claimed:

xwalker said:
The Cowboy have almost 150% more Rushing TDs from 2016 to 2018:
Cowboys 55
Eagles 37

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
We're not saying the same thing at all. They just aren't bright enough to figure it out.

Here's simple math problem they can't seem to figure out:

Joe Blow makes $37 an hour, while Jane Doe makes $55. How much more (in terms of percentage) does Jane Doe make than Joe Blow?

[I'll give you one hint....55 is not 150% more than 37]

Here's what xwalker actually claimed:

I dont need a hint LOL 55 would be a roughly 49.5 % increase of 37. 150% increase would be 92.5 . Now 55 is roughly 150% more than 37 . obviously, it is already more than 37 so there is 100% and we already figured out its 49.5 % more then 37 . So you get 150% "rounded up for ease"

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Birdgang said:
I dont need a hint LOL 55 would be a roughly 49.5 % increase of 37. 150% increase would be 92.5 . Now 55 is roughly 150% more than 37 . obviously, it is already more than 37 so there is 100% and we already figured out its 49.5 % more then 37 . So you get 150% "rounded up for ease"

The word more defines the intent of the information (albeit in error on his end). When you use the qualifier more in a word problem you're looking for the increase of one value (55 TDs in this case) from another (37 TDs).

This is his actual claim in context verbatim:

xwalker said:
The Cowboy have almost 150% more Rushing TDs from 2016 to 2018:
Cowboys 55
Eagles 37

If you received a raise going from $37/hour to $55/hour, nobody with any sense would describe that as making "150% more."

When you look at the context of his original claim there's no mistaking his error with what he was actually attempting to say.

Ask yourself this....given his actual statement above, what use does multiplying 150% by 37 actually provide when you're comparing the percentage difference (in this case % more) between two numbers?

StarOfGlory · May 20, 2019

For all the *****ing Dak and Wentz stans are making, there are quite a few teams in this league that would love to have either QB. Both of these players are more than good enough to get a team to the big game.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

StarOfGlory said:
For all the *****ing Dak and Wentz stans are making, there are quite a few teams in this league that would love to have either QB. Both of these players are more than good enough to get a team to the big game.

The grass is always greener on the other side. Some people are never happy no matter what. Can you believe we had Eagles fans unhappy that we won the SB ... all because it was Foles that did it and they were wrong about him. People are some pretty messed up things, could not imagine if intelligent life from another planet watched us how they would feel.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
The word more defines the intent of the information (albeit in error on his end). When you use the qualifier more in a word problem you're looking for the increase of one value (55 TDs in this case) from another (37 TDs).

This is his actual claim in context verbatim:

If you received a raise going from $37/hour to $55/hour, nobody with any sense would describe that as making "150% more."

When you look at the context of his original claim there's no mistaking his error with what he was actually attempting to say.

Ask yourself this....given his actual statement above, what use does multiplying 150% by 37 actually provide when you're comparing the percentage difference (in this case % more) between two numbers?

I stand by my statement before the last one. I think its just wording as both sides mean the same thing ... even if put in the wrong context. I have no side in this fight, I was just putting in my 2 cents.

By definition, percentage is a fraction or ratio expressed as part of 100. Percentage change is that action over time, long term, brief or momentary. Percentage change from one number to another number, is determined by dividing the difference of the two numbers by the original number. Obviously, there are two types of change, increase and decrease.

To determine percentage increase, divide the change by the original number. An increase from 25 to 75 is calculated in this manner. The difference is 50. 50/25 = 2. That figure times 100 = 200%, or an increase of 200%. Decrease is the exact same process. To determine the percentage decrease, make these calculations. A decrease from 75 to 50 works is calculated in this manner. 25/75 = .33, or a 33% decrease. In order to figure a percentage increase of anything, multiply the number by the percentage.

For example if you have a number of 100 and you wish to increase it by 50%, multiply 100 by 1.50 and get the result of 150. To determine the percent decrease of a number would be calculated like this. A 25% decrease of 100 is found by multiplying 100 by (100% - 25%) .75, or 75.

QuincyCarterEra · May 20, 2019

Kaiser said:
This is the 3rd or 4th time he has posted that - and been called on it - and he just now realized his mistake. And his whole schtick is claiming to be smart.

I'm embarrassed for him :facepalm:

CalPolyTechnique · May 20, 2019

Birdgang said:
I stand by my statement before the last one. I think its just wording as both sides mean the same thing ... even if put in the wrong context. I have no side in this fight, I was just putting in my 2 cents.

By definition, percentage is a fraction or ratio expressed as part of 100. Percentage change is that action over time, long term, brief or momentary. Percentage change from one number to another number, is determined by dividing the difference of the two numbers by the original number. Obviously, there are two types of change, increase and decrease.

To determine percentage increase, divide the change by the original number. An increase from 25 to 75 is calculated in this manner. The difference is 50. 50/25 = 2. That figure times 100 = 200%, or an increase of 200%. Decrease is the exact same process. To determine the percentage decrease, make these calculations. A decrease from 75 to 50 works is calculated in this manner. 25/75 = .33, or a 33% decrease. In order to figure a percentage increase of anything, multiply the number by the percentage.

For example if you have a number of 100 and you wish to increase it by 50%, multiply 100 by 1.50 and get the result of 150. To determine the percent decrease of a number would be calculated like this. A 25% decrease of 100 is found by multiplying 100 by (100% - 25%) .75, or 75.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand, 55 is ~48% more than 37.

Not 150%.

If xwalker’s claim was a word problem on a 5th grader’s math test there would be one correct answer.

You’re just being diplomatic.

There’s no need; the forum is already aware of these known simpletons.

Birdgang · May 20, 2019

CalPolyTechnique said:
Aaaaaaaaaaaand, 55 is ~48% more than 37.

Not 150%.

If xwalker’s claim was word problem on a 5th grader’s math test there would be one correct answer.

again from what I read , that you posted. He said almost 150% which would be ok as he is rounding up for semantics lets say. Lets try this ok ?

A percentage is a number expressed as a fraction of 100.
If a number is 100% (100 percent), then it is a “whole” – the same as one.
If a number is 50%, then it is a half – the same as 0.5 or 1/2.
If a number is 400%, then it is 4 times, the same as 4.

Increase from 50 by 25:
\frac(25)(50) \times 100\% = 0.5 \times 100\% = 50%
Increase from 75 by 25:
\frac(25)(75) \times 100\% = 0.333 \times 100\% = 33.3%
Increase from 0.0443 by 0.0001
\frac(0.0001)(0.0443) \times 100\% = 0.002257\times 100\% = 0.2257%

Stats Dak vs Wentz

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member