Video: Chris Canty, “Dak Prescott is the most overrated player in the NFL”

[SteveTheCowboy]

Fair enough....

So basically you're saying that the observation of other people who are professionals at the highest level of their profession, eyes have not seen what your eyes have seen correct??

So if you had a growth on your arm that you believed was just a bad rash and a the nurses, doctors and surgeons told you that its a dangerous cancerous growth that is painless....

I guess you'll believe your own observations because you obviously know more and have better observations than trained professionals at the highest levels, correct??? Hey... you the man!! Thats an incredible gift that you have bro!!

Your theory only works when you agree. When Kurt Warner breaks down daks play, you are like what does he know? He's doing that for clicks.

 

[GINeric]

Speaking of Marino, Manning, and Cousins.

Someone needs to explain how Dak is consistently ahead of Cousins in all these rankings while Cousins has been consistently better than Dak since Dak entered the league.

Cousins is a very good quarterback, but if he was a good as you're saying he is, he'd still be in Washington.

With that said everytime i post stats, im told they're meaningless. I wonder if you'll get the same response from the "stats are meaningless" crowd. Then again you probably won't, because they only say that when the stats show Dak's production in a positive light.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

If you call presenting facts a "game to get sucked into" then so be it. Facts and production is just what it is.

You're absolutely right, you choose who and where you get your information because thats your right and obviously, the observations from NFL professional execs, players, coaches and scouts from all over league don't carry much weight.....

Is that what you hide behind? Facts and stats?

Meaningless if you don't know what to do with them. Meaningless if you use them for an agenda. Meaningless without high level context.

A wise man has the wisdom to know someone might come to a different conclusion using the same facts and stats. Scientist s do it all the time. The wise man also treats them civilly and respectfully.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Cousins is a very good quarterback, but if he was a good as you're saying he is, he'd still be in Washington.

With that said everytime i post stats, im told they're meaningless. I wonder if you'll get the same response from the "stats are meaningless" crowd. Then again you probably won't, because they only say that when the stats show Dak's production in a positive light.

I think stats without context can be very deceiving.

The tweet I posted is a perfect example of that.

Nobody would ever think Marino, Manning, and Cousins are the same caliber player even though that particular stat says they are similar in that regard.

Stats aren't completely meaningless if used honestly, but stats without proper context are, in fact, meaningless. Because you can use stats to paint a picture that is deceiving if you do not provide context to how those stats were achieved.

I use this as an example a lot..... The 2020 Browns game. If you just looked the the box score you'd see Dak threw for 500 yards and 4 TDs. You think WOW, that was a great game, but what you wouldn't know is the score was 41-14 going into the 4th quarter.

That is an example of how stats without context can be used to deceive.

 

[G2]

Speaking of Marino, Manning, and Cousins.

Someone needs to explain how Dak is consistently ahead of Cousins in all these rankings while Cousins has been consistently better than Dak since Dak entered the league.

I would start by comparing Apples to Apples. This is quite the accomplishment for these guys. And the reason Prescott isn't on the list is because he's only started 85 games. It's difficult to compare when he hasn't reached 115 starts yet.

I think stats without context can be very deceiving.

The tweet I posted is a perfect example of that.

Nobody would ever think Marino, Manning, and Cousins are the same caliber player even though that particular stat says they are similar in that regard.

Stats aren't completely meaningless if used honestly, but stats without proper context are, in fact, meaningless. Because you can use stats to paint a picture that is deceiving if you do not provide context to how those stats were achieved.

I use this as an example a lot..... The 2020 Browns game. If you just looked the the box score you'd see Dak threw for 500 yards and 4 TDs. You think WOW, that was a great game, but what you wouldn't know is the score was 41-14 going into the 4th quarter.

That is an example of how stats without context can be used to deceive.

 

[phildadon86]

I think stats without context can be very deceiving.

The tweet I posted is a perfect example of that.

Nobody would ever think Marino, Manning, and Cousins are the same caliber player even though that particular stat says they are similar in that regard.

Stats aren't completely meaningless if used honestly, but stats without proper context are, in fact, meaningless. Because you can use stats to paint a picture that is deceiving if you do not provide context to how those stats were achieved.

I use this as an example a lot..... The 2020 Browns game. If you just looked the the box score you'd see Dak threw for 500 yards and 4 TDs. You think WOW, that was a great game, but what you wouldn't know is the score was 41-14 going into the 4th quarter.

That is an example of how stats without context can be used to deceive.

You do use this example a lot. What you always forget to bring up is that game was within 3 points. They blocked a FG and Jaylon Smith forgot to drop on the ball.

But sure. Use it to make Dak look bad.

Maybe if the defense could stop the run the Browns wouldn't have ran for 300 yards. But hey. Stats out of context are not to be taken into account right? LOL.

Winning and Losing is a team game. Your QB puts up 500 yards and 4 touchdowns. Your team wins 90 percent of the time. However. When you have the worst defense in franchise history. That is rarely the case.

So you are literally using stats to deceive in your post as well.

Please tell me that the Browns were in prevent and let the cowboys score 27 unanswered points just because...

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

You do use this example a lot. What you always forget to bring up is that game was within 3 points. They blocked a FG and Jaylon Smith forgot to drop on the ball.

But sure. Use it to make Dak look bad.

Maybe if the defense could stop the run the Browns wouldn't have ran for 300 yards. But hey. Stats out of context are not to be taken into account right? LOL.

Winning and Losing is a team game. Your QB puts up 500 yards and 4 touchdowns. Your team wins 90 percent of the time. However. When you have the worst defense in franchise history. That is rarely the case.

So you are literally using stats to deceive in your post as well.

Please tell me that the Browns were in prevent and let the cowboys score 27 unanswered points just because...

The Dak homers like yourself can't change what happened in that game.

And before you try and say you're not a Dak homer. You are.

 

[phildadon86]

The Dak homers like yourself can't change what happened in that game.

And before you try and say you're not a Dak homer. You are.

No. Just pointing out that the Cowboys were within 3 points in that game.

Any way you slice it. Its a fact. They lost.

And no. Im not.

You continue to prove that you are a hypocrite though.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

No. Just pointing out that the Cowboys were within 3 points in that game.

Any way you slice it. Its a fact. They lost.

And no. Im not.

You continue to prove that you are a hypocrite though.

You pounding your chest over a loss?

Are you proud of that game?

And yes, you are. Only massive Dak homers would be pounding their chests over loses.

 

[phildadon86]

You pounding your chest over a loss?

Are you proud of that game?

And yes, you are. Only massive Dak homers would be pounding their chests over loses.

I am not pounding my chest. I am simply stating that winning and losing is a team statistic. And that the team lost that game. Dak included. Regardless of the stats he put up.

All I was pointing out is that you saying stats without context by ONLY bringing up the score and not what actually happened in the game is hypocritical.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

I am not pounding my chest. I am simply stating that winning and losing is a team statistic. And that the team lost that game. Dak included. Regardless of the stats he put up.

All I was pointing out is that you saying stats without context by ONLY bringing up the score and not what actually happened in the game is hypocritical.

This is a Dak thread.

If you want to bring up defensive stats that are deceiving then start a thread about it. Sure, those stats exists too, just like every other positions, but this happens to be a Dak thread where Dak is being discussed.

I know you pride yourself in taking up for him and looking to put blame anywhere but Dak, but you can just miss me with that because I don't care in this particular thread.

Dak's stats are misleading in that Browns game. Maybe other stats from that same game are misleading too, but again, this is a Dak thread so we're only discussing Dak.

 

[G2]

Cousins is a very good quarterback, but if he was a good as you're saying he is, he'd still be in Washington.

With that said everytime i post stats, im told they're meaningless. I wonder if you'll get the same response from the "stats are meaningless" crowd. Then again you probably won't, because they only say that when the stats show Dak's production in a positive light.

He's trolling so hard he doesn't realize Dak has only started 85 games.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

I am not pounding my chest. I am simply stating that winning and losing is a team statistic. And that the team lost that game. Dak included. Regardless of the stats he put up.

All I was pointing out is that you saying stats without context by ONLY bringing up the score and not what actually happened in the game is hypocritical.

,,"Team game" ignores the fact that one play, one guy....can win or lose the game. You said so yourself about jaylon Smith.

This is where facts and stats can deceive without context.

Certainly there can be multiple moments through out the game. They don't always have to last second. I'm fond of using Murray's fumble against Packers. There's probably others in that game, sure. That was a pivotal one.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

He's trolling so hard he doesn't realize Dak has only started 85 games.

I'm fully aware how many games Dak has played.

I didn't bring up anything about the amount of games Dak has played.

You're just upset that you had no idea that CeeDee Lamb was a 1st round pick and you're reaching for a "gotcha thing" to try and get me back.

 

[phildadon86]

,,"Team game" ignores the fact that one play, one guy....can win or lose the game. You said so yourself about jaylon Smith.

This is where facts and stats can deceive without context.

Certainly there can be multiple moments through out the game. They don't always have to last second. I'm fond of using Murray's fumble against Packers. There's probably others in that game, sure. That was a pivotal one.

Oh I agree 100 percent. They lost that game regardless of one play. Jaylons play was crucial at that juncture in the game though. I said team game because the team lost. You cant put that on Dak because his stats are "deceptive". They lost because the defense couldnt stop the run, Dak had a horrible 1st and 2nd quarter and Jaylon forgot how to fall down. Dak and the offense put them in a position to win the game though. So thats why I was also saying that stats are deceptive.

And you and I agree a million percent on the Murray fumble in that game. Completely shifted momentum back to GB.

 

[phildadon86]

I'm fully aware how many games Dak has played.

I didn't bring up anything about the amount of games Dak has played.

You're just upset that you had no idea that CeeDee Lamb was a 1st round pick and you're reaching for a "gotcha thing" to try and get me back.

Wait what? lol.

 

[G2]

,,"Team game" ignores the fact that one play, one guy....can win or lose the game. You said so yourself about jaylon Smith.

This is where facts and stats can deceive without context.

Certainly there can be multiple moments through out the game. They don't always have to last second. I'm fond of using Murray's fumble against Packers. There's probably others in that game, sure. That was a pivotal one.

You could then look to a copious amount of plays to point the finger at. Depending on how you lean.

The Murray fumble is a touch misunderstood as a clear culprit. From the sidelines, defenders would have tackled him had he not fumbled and caused them to stop pursuit of him as a runner, but looking for the fumble.

 

[phildadon86]

You could then look to a copious amount of plays to point the finger at. Depending on how you lean.

The Murray fumble is a touch misunderstood as a clear culprit. From the sidelines, defenders would have tackled him had he not fumbled and caused them to stop pursuit of him as a runner, but looking for the fumble.

A tackle would have been fine in that situation. He had the first and then some. He had open field in front of him. The fumble killed the momentum the Cowboys had built on after that stupid "catch" Cobb made on the grass.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Wait what? lol.

He said something along the lines of "Let's see how Dak does now that he doesn't have a 1st round #1 receiver" in another thread (referencing Cooper).

I informed him that Dak does, still in fact, have a 1st rounder #1 receiver in CeeDee Lamb.

He's been bothered about it ever since because he apparently forgot CeeDee Lamb existed.

 

[phildadon86]

He said something along the lines of "Let's see how Dak does now that he doesn't have a 1st round #1 receiver" in another thread (referencing Cooper).

I informed him that Dak does, still in fact, have a 1st rounder #1 receiver in CeeDee Lamb.

He's been bothered about it ever since because he apparently forgot CeeDee Lamb existed.

Oh lord