A Sort Of Riddle

[Shake_Tiller]

Take a look at stats for four wide receivers. Any conclusions to be drawn?

The first guy, obviously, is an elite player, and his team is in the playoffs. The second guy is good, really good at getting the ball in the end zone. He plays for a .500 team. The third guy is pretty fringe as an NFL starter. He makes some catches, but his yardage production is pretty dismal. His team also finished at .500. Probably a third WR type. The fourth guy shouldn’t have, in any circumstance, been an NFL starter. He doesn’t catch many balls, and he doesn’t do much with the balls he does catch. His team finished .500. He's not much more than a fringe player... maybe a fourth guy.

Receiver A caught 84 balls for 2,012 yards and 16 touchdowns. His team finished at 12-4.
Receiver B caught 76 balls for 1,152 yards and 16 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.
Receiver C caught 68 balls for 592 yards and 4 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.
Receiver D caught 48 balls for 452 yards and 4 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.

I just wonder if anyone sees anything in these numbers of substantial interest. Are there any conclusions to be drawn? I’ve intentionally withheld identity here, obviously.

 

[cowboys5]

?????????????

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

I conclude the fact that WR A having over 2000 yards is pretty amazing! Silly me I thought Rice held the record w/ over 1800yds; who is that stud?!

 

[boba5555]

Receiver A caught 84 balls for 2,012 yards and 16 touchdowns. His team finished at 12-4.
Receiver B caught 76 balls for 1,152 yards and 16 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.
Receiver C caught 68 balls for 592 yards and 4 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.
Receiver D caught 48 balls for 452 yards and 4 touchdowns. His team finished at 8-8.

I just wonder if anyone sees anything in these numbers of substantial interest. Are there any conclusions to be drawn? I’ve intentionally withheld identity here, obviously.

Don't know if this is what you are talking about but from a brain with a degree in Mathematics, the first thing i saw was that all of the numbers listed are multiples of 4(divisible by 4)

 

[joseephuss]

I conclude the fact that WR A having over 2000 yards is pretty amazing! Silly me I thought Rice held the record w/ over 1800yds; who is that stud?!

I guess that includes the post-season.

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

I guess that includes the post-season.

Then he should've included that in his team's record... I'm still curious to know what he's getting at...could this be another Owens-bashing thread in the making?

 

[KingintheNorth]

receiver A had a 24 yard per catch reception.
receiver B caught 8 less balls but had 860 fewer yards.


My conclusion is that receiver A is a beast. Am I correct?

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Sorry for making this so opaque, but I wanted people to have a look and maybe think a little bit about it without there appearing to be an agenda. All four sets of statistics are the "same guy." One represents totals from Owens' four best 2008 games, annualized to a full season. The second, obviously: his totals for the next best four games, again annualized. And so on...

I have a few thoughts about what some of it might suggest, but I was interested first in seeing whether anyone else drew any conclusions...

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Then he should've included that in his team's record... I'm still curious to know what he's getting at...could this be another Owens-bashing thread in the making?

I don't know whether it's an Owens bashing thread or not. It's intended to offer maybe a closer look at what he did and didn't do. It could be interpreted many different ways, I suppose.

 

[CF74]

Sorry for making this so opaque, but I wanted people to have a look and maybe think a little bit about it without there appearing to be an agenda. All four sets of statistics are the "same guy." One represents totals from Owens' four best 2008 games, annualized to a full season. The second, obviously: his totals for the next best four games, again annualized. And so on...

I have a few thoughts about what some of it might suggest, but I was interested first in seeing whether anyone else drew any conclusions...

We excel at the beginning of the season and fizzle out as teams prepare for us down the road.

 

[Apollo Creed]

We excel at the beginning of the season and fizzle out as teams prepare for us down the road.

Bingo. We drafted Felix Jones to add that extra element, and provide a guy who can house it any time he touches the ball. I think having him back will allow our offense to really counter teams trying to blitz so much, and give our offensive line some protection.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

I agree with the view that Felix will change things, assuming he is healthy. But I have to make the point that the numbers are not chronological. They are Owens' four best games, next best, etc... each of them is a mix of early season, mid season and late season games.

Here are two conclusions:

1) When Owens was really good, the Cowboys usually won. They were 3-1.

2) There wasn't any win/loss correlation beyond those best showings. Whether Owens was merely good, or really bad (statistically), in every instance the team was 2-2.

It's such a small sample, it could be utterly meaningless data. But I wasn't surprised by the outcome. In my view, WRs make a huge impact on wins and losses mainly when they are outstanding. Otherwise, their influence is fairly limited, compared to some other positions.

This also is pretty clear: Owens was wildly inconsistent (statistically, anyhow). Some of this was due to the Romo injury, but that wasn't by any means the entire story. Owens had statistically unproductive games both with and without Romo at QB. In fairness, Owens had no big games without Romo playing, which I'm sure comes as no surprise to you.

Now it comes down to your viewpoint.

I think an Owens skeptic would conclude that his skills are eroding, and in the manner of many older athletes, he is able to perform at a high level now and then but not on a consistent basis.

I think an Owens supporter would argue that the Cowboys need Owens playing productively in order to be a winning team.

I think it's fair to conclude that Owens' impact, while important, is probably overstated. The Cowboys won as often when he was virtually shut down as they did when he was a big contributor. They only won more often when he was absolutely scintillating.

Of course, these numbers prove nothing, and others could find many different interpretations, I'm sure. I just thought the season (whether you think it was good or bad) was remarkable in its volatility, its sheer lack of consistency.

 

[thechosen1n2]

I agree with the view that Felix will change things, assuming he is healthy. But I have to make the point that the numbers are not chronological. They are Owens' four best games, next best, etc... each of them is a mix of early season, mid season and late season games.

Here are two conclusions:

1) When Owens was really good, the Cowboys usually won. They were 3-1.

2) There wasn't any win/loss correlation beyond those best showings. Whether Owens was merely good, or really bad (statistically), in every instance the team was 2-2.

It's such a small sample, it could be utterly meaningless data. But I wasn't surprised by the outcome. In my view, WRs make a huge impact on wins and losses mainly when they are outstanding. Otherwise, their influence is fairly limited, compared to some other positions.

This also is pretty clear: Owens was wildly inconsistent (statistically, anyhow). Some of this was due to the Romo injury, but that wasn't by any means the entire story. Owens had statistically unproductive games both with and without Romo at QB. In fairness, Owens had no big games without Romo playing, which I'm sure comes as no surprise to you.

Now it comes down to your viewpoint.

I think an Owens skeptic would conclude that his skills are eroding, and in the manner of many older athletes, he is able to perform at a high level now and then but not on a consistent basis.

I think an Owens supporter would argue that the Cowboys need Owens playing productively in order to be a winning team.

I think it's fair to conclude that Owens' impact, while important, is probably overstated. The Cowboys won as often when he was virtually shut down as they did when he was a big contributor. They only won more often when he was absolutely scintillating.

Of course, these numbers prove nothing, and others could find many different interpretations, I'm sure. I just thought the season (whether you think it was good or bad) was remarkable in its volatility, its sheer lack of consistency.

im not so sure that TO's skills have eroded (people said the same about randy moss before 07-08 season). As a matter of fact, I would argue that they have. TO, Crayton, and RW11 production all dropped last year. Did all of them lose a step. Even the teams favorite target statistics dropped. This is a Tell Tell sign. QB play/Game planning was not as good. You mean Every Reciever got worst...I highly doubt it.

 

[Bleu Star]

Go Willie go!

:banjo: :fogeys:

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Go Willie go!

:banjo: :fogeys:

Um, huh?

 

[adbutcher]

im not so sure that TO's skills have eroded (people said the same about randy moss before 07-08 season). As a matter of fact, I would argue that they have. TO, Crayton, and RW11 production all dropped last year. Did all of them lose a step. Even the teams favorite target statistics dropped. This is a Tell Tell sign. QB play/Game planning was not as good. You mean Every Reciever got worst...I highly doubt it.

Great point. The only other reason why WRs numbers would decline would be the team running the ball better and more frequently. However, we know that wasn't the case.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Great point. The only other reason why WRs numbers would decline would be the team running the ball better and more frequently. However, we know that wasn't the case.

Honestly, regardless of my position on Owens, I'm not presenting these numbers to make a case (and I'm not sure I care for the implications of Bleu Star's reply). As I wrote, one could argue this is evidence the Cowboys need Owens playing at a high level in order to be better than a .500 team. I was curious how people would interpret what I think is a striking set of stats... mostly the wide range of game-by-game outcomes, which if you look at the season chronologically, are random in nature other than when Romo was injured.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

im not so sure that TO's skills have eroded (people said the same about randy moss before 07-08 season). As a matter of fact, I would argue that they have. TO, Crayton, and RW11 production all dropped last year. Did all of them lose a step. Even the teams favorite target statistics dropped. This is a Tell Tell sign. QB play/Game planning was not as good. You mean Every Reciever got worst...I highly doubt it.

TO

In 2008/13 games with Romo he had 10 TD.

Plug Romo in for those 3 games and you are back to avg of 14TD/season with Cowboys.

Before last season he averaged 14 TD's since joining Cowboys(13 TD in 2006, 15 in 2007).




I would say that averaging 14 TD's/season is GREAT for a WR that is old and losing steps by the day... while at the same time that he is losing steps.... runs step for step with young'un in Felix Jones as he escorts him to the End Zone "untouched"............... whew!