Breaking Down the NFC East

[theogt]

Of course, you are talking now about a 3rd or 4th WR's productivity - he had better YPA averages in those years -- 8.6 in 2007, 10.75 in 2006, and 9.7 in 2005.

Now compare that to the actual #2 in 2006, TG. He had 9.5 YPA.

Looking at that I'd say, that PC is actually performing worse now that the QB is better and that he's not as good at #2 as he was at #3.

But it does tend to show that the difference isn't Romo, which then goes back to showing that he's a better #2 than Burress.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Of course, you are talking now about a 3rd or 4th WR's productivity - he had better YPA averages in those years -- 8.6 in 2007, 10.75 in 2006, and 9.7 in 2005.

Now compare that to the actual #2 in 2006, TG. He had 9.5 YPA.

Looking at that I'd say, that PC is actually performing worse now that the QB is better and that he's not as good at #2 as he was at #3.

if that's playing worse, I'll take that every day of the week

 

[AbeBeta]

But it does tend to show that the difference isn't Romo, which then goes back to showing that he's a better #2 than Burress.

We've got multiple forces working here. In this case, I'd say that the difference from season to season is attributable to the apples and oranges comparison of 2nd to 3rd WR - I think the 2nd guy is far more likely to have to play a possession WR role whereas the 3rd is often in more of a "go" role. However, in comparing Toomer (I knew who you meant) to Crayton, we can compare apples -- and the difference there is that one is catching balls from a guy who has a higher YPA average

 

[jobberone]

Romo needs to take more sacks and cut back on the INTs, if he does that he will darn near own not only the NFC east, but the NFL.

Or throw the ball away and discard the Superman cape.

 

[theogt]

We've got multiple forces working here. In this case, I'd say that the difference from season to season is attributable to the apples and oranges comparison of 2nd to 3rd WR - I think the 2nd guy is far more likely to have to play a possession WR role whereas the 3rd is often in more of a "go" role. However, in comparing Toomer (I knew who you meant) to Crayton, we can compare apples -- and the difference there is that one is catching balls from a guy who has a higher YPA average

Here's what we do know.

1. In all cases (i.e., with Bledsoe and with Romo) he has better YPA than Toomer.

2. Under Bledsoe his YPA was significantly higher.

3. Under Bledsoe he played 3rd receiver and under Romo he has played 2nd receiver.

You're arguing that moving from 3rd to 2nd receiver should account for his significant drop in YPA. But this isn't all that you're arguing. You're arguing that moving from 3rd to 2nd receiver drops his YPA not only what is noticeable, but beyond that because "the Romo effect" increases his YPA to an extent.

That's quite a stretch.

 

[AbeBeta]

Here's what we do know.

1. In all cases (i.e., with Bledsoe and with Romo) he has better YPA than Toomer.

2. Under Bledsoe his YPA was significantly higher.

3. Under Bledsoe he played 3rd receiver and under Romo he has played 2nd receiver.

You're arguing that moving from 3rd to 2nd receiver should account for his significant drop in YPA. But this isn't all that you're arguing. You're arguing that moving from 3rd to 2nd receiver drops his YPA not only what is noticeable, but beyond that because "the Romo effect" increases his YPA to an extent.

That's quite a stretch.

No, what I was arguing is that the statistics we see don't paint enough of a picture to tell us much.

My original point and the one I continue to make is that the statistics presented don't allow us to conclude all that much about Crayton as there are so many other factors at play. But some folks feel that any single statistic they can come up with that supports what they want to conclude is sufficient to make an argument.

And you've misinterpreted my "Romo effect" claim -- first, I noted that we have no information about what 3rd receivers typically do -- so 2005 and 2006 are not meaningful comparisons - so your point one and two, as I noted noted are irrelevant.

Point #3, under Romo he was the #3 in 2006, not #2 as you note. Also, I noted that he did well in 2007 but that he also played with the NFC's top YPA QB whereas Toomer played with the worst. Let's see, Romo best in the NFC, Manning worst. Ya think that has something to do with how every WR comes out?

 

[theogt]

No, what I was arguing is that the statistics we see don't paint enough of a picture to tell us much.

My original point and the one I continue to make is that the statistics presented don't allow us to conclude all that much about Crayton as there are so many other factors at play. But some folks feel that any single statistic they can come up with that supports what they want to conclude is sufficient to make an argument.

And you've misinterpreted my "Romo effect" claim -- first, I noted that we have no information about what 3rd receivers typically do -- so 2005 and 2006 are not meaningful comparisons - so your point one and two, as I noted noted are irrelevant.

Point #3, under Romo he was the #3 in 2006, not #2 as you note. Also, I noted that he did well in 2007 but that he also played with the NFC's top YPA QB whereas Toomer played with the worst. Let's see, Romo best in the NFC, Manning worst. Ya think that has something to do with how every WR comes out?

I don't buy into the notion that because you can't know everything you can't know anything. I think you can clearly show persuasive evidence that Crayton is the same caliber player as Toomer today (not the Toomer of 5-6 years ago).

And we all know TO > Burress.

 

[AbeBeta]

I don't buy into the notion that because you can't know everything you can't know anything. I think you can clearly show persuasive evidence that Crayton is the same caliber player as Toomer today (not the Toomer of 5-6 years ago).

And we all know TO > Burress.

You can look at the most direct relationships or ancillary ones. Romo top had the top YPA in the NFC, Manning was at the bottom. Me, I'd rather look at the guy who gets the ball on every play, not the guy involved in <100 plays and then draw conclusions from there. Doing so clearly shows that Romo > Manning on the statistic of interest.

Crayton > Toomer is likely a product of that relationship -- unless you think it goes the other way (Crayton makes Romo better than Manning).

 

[theogt]

You can look at the most direct relationships or ancillary ones. Romo top had the top YPA in the NFC, Manning was at the bottom. Me, I'd rather look at the guy who gets the ball on every play, not the guy involved in <100 plays and then draw conclusions from there. Doing so clearly shows that Romo > Manning on the statistic of interest.

Crayton > Toomer is likely a product of that relationship -- unless you think it goes the other way (Crayton makes Romo better than Manning).

We're going in circles.

1. You say Crayton's YPA is high because of Romo.

2. I say Crayton's YPA was even higher before Romo.

3. You say that was because Crayton was a 3rd receiver.

4. I say, how do we know that has any effect whatsoever, much less such a significant effect?

Rinse. Repeat.

Bottom line is there's circumstantial evidence of Romo not being the leading cause of his high YPA.