AdamJT13 v. The Horde

[BigStar]

Damn dude, if ANY team loses it's QB for a long period (especially the entire year) they're likely done. Where have you seen anyone post otherwise?

We will need someone to convert those 3rd downs when needed. Is that better? Moore or Dak? People minimized Romo's impact in 2014 and I argued he was still needed to make that run and was the best QB in doing so. That was all. Was a pro Romo post...

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Yea, I'll admit I'm in the camp that believes the threat of a good running game increases the effectiveness of Romo. Brady and Rogers have proven they can win without a running game, but as much as I'm a Romo fan, I don't think he's as good as either. I think even prior to 2014, when Murray was running well, Romo was more efficient in his passing and even if he passed for more yards and TDs in the other games, his best work was when he did not need to light up the score board.

The difference between Romo and Rodgers is that often enough they had pass defenses that helped them win the passer efficiency battle. You do that and you win 4 of 5.

We didnt/still don't have that kind of pass defense. And when given the chance to get a generational type pass defender prospect..... We drafted a rb.

 

[erod]

If your pick has to be a hall of Famer for it to be justified...You dun goofed.

At #4, he'd better be in the top five backs in the league right now. Top backs don't disappear in four years unless they're built like Eddie Lacy or Natrone Means.

Elliott has a compact, sturdy build, and he doesn't take a lot of shots. He'll be around in 8-10 years given moderate injury good fortune.

Arian Foster, Matt Forte, Curtis Martin, Marshawn Lynch, Demarco Murray.....you don't think he can last as long as those guys?

 

[Common Sense]

Parcells always used to say that it didn't matter whether you ran the ball well or not, just as long as you ran it, which was basically another way of saying that committing to the run can open up the pass -- but what it also says is that the running game doesn't have to be particular effective or efficient as long as it is USED.

In basketball, you have the idea of a usage-efficiency curve. You take someone like Carmelo Anthony, who may not be the most efficient shooter, but still forces the defense to account for him, which opens up other players and makes them statistically more efficient. When Melo is out of the game, his teammates' productivity actually tends to drop.

I've seen all the numbers that suggest the most efficient passing team wins at the end of the day, but I've yet to see a single stat that suggests the running game can't influence that in any way. A team who is rushing for less than 4 yards per carry may be doing so because they've forced the defense to stack the box and utilize fewer DBs in favor of bigger, slower personnel. That opens up the pass, and -- guess what -- makes it statistically more efficient. And that team probably wins not because of the running game, but because of the threat the running game posed.

More basketball analytics stuff if anyone cares:
http://www.countthebasket.com/blog/2008/03/06/diminishing-returns-for-scoring-usage-vs-efficiency/
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2015/12/statistical-analysis-basketball

 

[BigStar]

I've read the entire thread, thank you very much, and the one that brought this one to life. Did you?

Then you missed my point entirely

 

[waving monkey]

The elliott pick will mean nothing if Romo goes down.

that has little to do with the pick. if Romo goes down any pick would mean nothing,?

 

[Cowboy06]

The Horde: YES WE GOT ZEKE!!1!

AdamJT13: Unfortunately, decades' worth of statistical evidence shows that rushing effectiveness has little correlation to winning. *cites said evidence in painstaking detail*

The Horde: That's stoopid! Zeke is da man!

AdamJT13: Elliott may very well be a good player. But his ability to run the ball has little bearing on whether the Cowboys win. The evidence clearly demonstrates that teams win when they pass the ball better than their opponents.

The Horde: Well...that's just your opinion man!

AdamJT13: Actually, that's a fact, not an opinion.

The Horde: But but but running teh ball makes Romo better! Just like in 2014 with Murray!

AdamJT13: There's no correlation between rushing effectiveness and passing effectiveness. *cites evidence in support of claim* In 2014, for example, the Cowboys won the games where they passed the ball better than their opponents and lost the games where they didn't. There was no correlation between Murray's rushing effectiveness in those games and Romo's passing effectiveness. *cites evidence in support of claim*

The Horde: ARE YOU BLIND? OF COURSE HAVING A DOMINANT RUN GAME HELPS DO YOU EVEN WATCH DA GAMES YOU *?#$

AdamJT13: Yes, I watched and charted every game, just like I've done for many years. What evidence do you have in support of your assertion?

The Horde: iM to busy to look it up but everyone says so

AdamJT13: *closes eyes, takes a deep breath, exhales*

Adam, that was some funny stuff. It's funny watching people make claims (not opinions) without facts... Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[CF74]

The Horde: YES WE GOT ZEKE!!1!

AdamJT13: Unfortunately, decades' worth of statistical evidence shows that rushing effectiveness has little correlation to winning. *cites said evidence in painstaking detail*

The Horde: That's stoopid! Zeke is da man!

AdamJT13: Elliott may very well be a good player. But his ability to run the ball has little bearing on whether the Cowboys win. The evidence clearly demonstrates that teams win when they pass the ball better than their opponents.

The Horde: Well...that's just your opinion man!

AdamJT13: Actually, that's a fact, not an opinion.

The Horde: But but but running teh ball makes Romo better! Just like in 2014 with Murray!

AdamJT13: There's no correlation between rushing effectiveness and passing effectiveness. *cites evidence in support of claim* In 2014, for example, the Cowboys won the games where they passed the ball better than their opponents and lost the games where they didn't. There was no correlation between Murray's rushing effectiveness in those games and Romo's passing effectiveness. *cites evidence in support of claim*

The Horde: ARE YOU BLIND? OF COURSE HAVING A DOMINANT RUN GAME HELPS DO YOU EVEN WATCH DA GAMES YOU *?#$

AdamJT13: Yes, I watched and charted every game, just like I've done for many years. What evidence do you have in support of your assertion?

The Horde: iM to busy to look it up but everyone says so

AdamJT13: *closes eyes, takes a deep breath, exhales*

LOL!!!

Welcome to Romo's Statistics Zone....

 

[waving monkey]

has there ever been a thread devoted to the infallibility of a poster
thats pretty strong statement right there

 

[Romotil45]

Lets say Romo is healthy for 16 games. What is your prediction on record and what is your prediction on what Zeke will do stats wise?

I say he gets around 250 carries for about 1250 yrds. Which would be really good for a rookie but McFadden, Morris and a 4th round rookie would have given similar overall results. I really do not see them loading him up with 300 plus carries. Perhaps he could see 20-25 touches in the playoffs but not the regular season.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

The difference between Romo and Rodgers is that often enough they had pass defenses that helped them win the passer efficiency battle. You do that and you win 4 of 5.

We didnt/still don't have that kind of pass defense. And when given the chance to get a generational type pass defender prospect..... We drafted a rb.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on both your points. I don't believe the only difference between Rogers and Romo are a good pass defense. There have been some times that Rogers has not had good defenses and has done more than Romo in those years. Not knocking Romo, because I think Rogers and Brady are 2 of the top 3 QBs of this era, with Manning being in there as well, and thus I do think he's not as good as them.

And second, I just don't see Ramsey as a generational talent. How is he better than Peterson who came out in 2011 (this generation)? Or Richard Sherman (who wasn't a great prospect, but I don't think Ramsey projects to be as good) or Joe Haden (2010)?

 

[VirusX]

Good lord, Armchair GM's need to just deal with it... We picked a RB not an overrated CB... We picked an injured top 10 draft pick in the second round.

I don't think i've ever seen this much crying on this board in 12 years...

Go lookup BP's post.. Read that and move on.

 

[BourbonBalz]

We will need someone to convert those 3rd downs when needed. Is that better? Moore or Dak? People minimized Romo's impact in 2014 and I argued he was still needed to make that run and was the best QB in doing so. That was all. Was a pro Romo post...

I happen to be in the camp that thinks for the past 5-6 years we would have won 4-5 games a year without Romo. He has carried the team. But, he hasn't had the pieces around him to make it count. A great running game helps any QB immensely in several ways. This thread and the previous one started based in one assumption: Adam said a good running game isn't an important in determine how a team performs. I and many others greatly disagree. That's all.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Parcells always used to say that it didn't matter whether you ran the ball well or not, just as long as you ran it, which was basically another way of saying that committing to the run can open up the pass -- but what it also says is that the running game doesn't have to be particular effective or efficient as long as it is USED.

I agree with that take.

And I think a lot of folks agree with Parcells on that.

Now flip it the other way and let's pretend Parcells said, "It doesn't matter whether you passed the pass well or not, just as long as you passed it."

I mean no one would buy into that.

Efficiency in the passing game is everything.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Funny is the people who were players, coaches, and even an ex-GM were speaking before the draft how Elliott would be the smartest pick.

Then after, seems most of the folks on NFLN and ESPN thought a great deal about the Dallas pick?

I tend to rely on and believe those that were actually involved with the game as opposed to message board statisticians .

 

[BourbonBalz]

The difference between Romo and Rodgers is that often enough they had pass defenses that helped them win the passer efficiency battle. You do that and you win 4 of 5.

We didnt/still don't have that kind of pass defense. And when given the chance to get a generational type pass defender prospect..... We drafted a rb.

Actually Green Bay has had some pretty average to poor defenses over the past few years.

 

[DFWJC]

Good lord, Armchair GM's need to just deal with it... We picked a RB not an overrated CB... We picked an injured top 10 draft pick in the second round.

I don't think i've ever seen this much crying on this board in 12 years...

Go lookup BP's post.. Read that and move on.

Name one person that doesn't think Elliott will be good

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Look, I appreciate AdamJT13 as much as the next Cowboy fan and truly believe he's a cut above many of the posters here in his knowledge and ability to analyze data.

But he is not infallible.

And I'll remind you that AdamJT13 was also a STRONG proponent of Roy Williams (the safety) and produced eloquent arguments on his behalf, particularly when other posters here were saying that Roy Williams couldn't adapt his game to the way safeties are now expected to play the game.

And the other posters were right.

So, again, admire AdamJT13, but don't act as if he can't be wrong either.

Football isn't a game always measured in data and stats and measurables. Sometimes, there's a factor that be observed even if it can't be quantified. It's called the "it" factor in some cases and intuition and instincts in others.

Just saying.

Roy Williams changed psychologically. I can see and understand how Adam was wrong. RW31 got paid, found God, and stopped playing mad. Without the intimidation factor, teams could exploit his marginal quicks.

That is a red herring though. It has nothing to do with this argument though. It's guilt by association tripe.

Adam has shown how you can get all of the benefits you guys claim just from running the ball. I have not seen a rational rebuttal to that. Instead I see a bunch of wannabe Mike Ditkas willing to trade the farm for a RB.

 

[the_h0wey]

But Zeke is already a top-3 Running Back in the league.








YR

You must have missed a few threads. He is a first ballot hall of famer and ring of honor inductee

 

[VirusX]

Name one person that doesn't think Elliott will be good

I am a life long Buckeye. You'll not hear an argument from me on picking Zeke... The sheer amount of crying done because we didnt draft Ramsey is what gets me... Or the fact we drafted a RB.

Come the end of the year they will all be eating crow.... (Zeke doubters)