JJT: Cowboys offense no juggernaut

[ShiningStar]

We had the worst defense in the league. What kind of record did you think we could finish up with given that fact?

teh same i would expect of an offense who tried their hardest to go 3 and out when the defense needed a break. How about an offense that tried to work a rookie into the mix with a competitor that THEY knew the rookie was not ready for, wheres the stats on that.

I notice this with stats, the real stats you always want are NEVER avaliable. Find me the stat on where the opposing coaches stole Garretts lunch and ate it front of him? If its one thing a coach can NOT save his career on, its a stat.

Garretts offense and use of personnel leaves a lot to be desired, and theres no stat for that.

 

[ShiningStar]

It depends on the stats, and on the story. But there's no doubt that there are stats that measure the things that correlate most strongly to winning in the NFL. It's not a matter of opinion, it's just math. These guys can argue with the correlations, maybe, or point out other correlations or adjustments to the correlating data that are relevant or that further unpack an argument or assumption. That's convincing when it happens.

What they can't do--with the hope of changing the opinion of anyone actually bothering to pay attention to what's really going on--is appeal to their own emotional interpretation of what their own eyes saw and act like that's a rational argument against a highly-correlating win statistic. It doesn't matter how many people used their own eyes and happen to agree with them. It's either measurable, or it's an opinion, and not all opinions are created equal.

Heres two things a stat can not do, win you the game Nor save your career. Ive never heard of a coach go into a meeting, use a stat and than hear the owner say "well, due to that stat, you can keep your job'. Unless you have a stat for that.

 

[Idgit]

Heres two things a stat can not do, win you the game Nor save your career. Ive never heard of a coach go into a meeting, use a stat and than hear the owner say "well, due to that stat, you can keep your job'. Unless you have a stat for that.

Well, this is accurate. But that's not what stats are supposed to do with stats in the first place. If you're measuring the right things, stats are supposed to let you know where you're strong and where you're weak. It's up to you to react to that information the right way.

But we're not fighting for a coach's job here in this thread. We're evaluating whether or not the Cowboys' offense was weak and where the team was weak and then discussing what should be done from there. This is exactly the context where you'd want to be measuring things and making arguments about what decisions should be made as a result. Instead, we're playing these absurd opinion games.

It'd be like me, working with my contractor on building my deck and him marking off a redwood board and 14' with his tape measure and me telling him that, by my reckoning, the board was actually only 12 and a half feet. My argument for that might be 'the eye in the sky don't lie.' And then my buddy might walk out with a freshly opened beer and say 'yeah, that's only 12 and a half feet.' Guess what? The board is 14'. Because the guy bothered to measure it. It can be measured. You can look at a thousand other 14' boards, and they're all the same size, and they can all be measured. Because we know at this point how long 14' feel actually is. Me and my buddy were both wrong, whether we realized it or not or cared to admit it. And it's not a topic that's open for discussion and it's not a who's-to-say. We're just wrong because we ballparked it while the other guy bothered to measure it.

We have enough data to know what wins and loses games in the NFL. The reasons getting floated in this thread, for the most part, are not reasons why teams lose games. I don't care what the eyeball test has to say about it, because the eyeball test is not the best way to answer these particular questions.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Heres two things a stat can not do, win you the game Nor save your career. Ive never heard of a coach go into a meeting, use a stat and than hear the owner say "well, due to that stat, you can keep your job'. Unless you have a stat for that.

Stats are the ONLY thing that can win you the game. "Points scored" and "points allowed" are both stats.

As for coaches, two questions: (1) What have you heard about what coaches say in meetings that keep or lose their job for them? (2) You don't think Andy Reid would use, "this team went 2-14 last year and 11-5 this year," as an argument to keep his job?

 

[ShiningStar]

Well, this is accurate. But that's not what stats are supposed to do with stats in the first place. If you're measuring the right things, stats are supposed to let you know where you're strong and where you're weak. It's up to you to react to that information the right way.

But we're not fighting for a coach's job here in this thread. We're evaluating whether or not the Cowboys' offense was weak and where the team was weak and then discussing what should be done from there. This is exactly the context where you'd want to be measuring things and making arguments about what decisions should be made as a result. Instead, we're playing these absurd opinion games.

It'd be like me, working with my contractor on building my deck and him marking off a redwood board and 14' with his tape measure and me telling him that, by my reckoning, the board was actually only 12 and a half feet. My argument for that might be 'the eye in the sky don't lie.' And then my buddy might walk out with a freshly opened beer and say 'yeah, that's only 12 and a half feet.' Guess what? The board is 14'. Because the guy bothered to measure it. It can be measured. You can look at a thousand other 14' boards, and they're all the same size, and they can all be measured. Because we know at this point how long 14' feel actually is. Me and my buddy were both wrong, whether we realized it or not or cared to admit it. And it's not a topic that's open for discussion and it's not a who's-to-say. We're just wrong because we ballparked it while the other guy bothered to measure it.

We have enough data to know what wins and loses games in the NFL. The reasons getting floated in this thread, for the most part, are not reasons why teams lose games. I don't care what the eyeball test has to say about it, because the eyeball test is not the best way to answer these particular questions.

The team was weak under garrett, its something stats cant measure, called ignorance, or a lack of a snickers bar. Either way, the stats only back up what you wish to look at, want to look at the picture, throw the stats out, look at why the defense was horrendous and how someone got to keep a job. Show me the stat that HELPED us lose the GB game, want to know, lack of football knowledge. Want to know what stats cant show you, why your RB is doing a great job but the coach gets away from it.

THe things that are going to show you if you are a weak or strong, WILL not come from stats, again, a coach is not going to walk into that meeting with a crap load of stats, hes going to talk, and either he is going to know how to fix it, or a coaching game is happening. Either way, stats wont be there. Why, because they cant tell you anything. Sure they can tell you that the QB is doing a good job okay when is he doing a good job? up against bad teams, up against a certain defense, or when key players are out of the defense. heres another stat i dont see, the times Dallas wont expose a weak link on their opponents. Why wont Garrett jump on that? Do the stats back him up on it?

 

[ShiningStar]

Stats are the ONLY thing that can win you the game. "Points scored" and "points allowed" are both stats.

As for coaches, two questions: (1) What have you heard about what coaches say in meetings that keep or lose their job for them? (2) You don't think Andy Reid would use, "this team went 2-14 last year and 11-5 this year," as an argument to keep his job?

the rest of us, and the league use this technology called the score board. been around a lot longer. works too.

 

[JD_KaPow]

the rest of us, and the league use this technology called the score board. been around a lot longer. works too.

"Been around a lot longer" than what? The scoreboard exists to record stats.

 

[Idgit]

The team was weak under garrett, its something stats cant measure, called ignorance, or a lack of a snickers bar. Either way, the stats only back up what you wish to look at, want to look at the picture, throw the stats out, look at why the defense was horrendous and how someone got to keep a job. Show me the stat that HELPED us lose the GB game, want to know, lack of football knowledge. Want to know what stats cant show you, why your RB is doing a great job but the coach gets away from it.

THe things that are going to show you if you are a weak or strong, WILL not come from stats, again, a coach is not going to walk into that meeting with a crap load of stats, hes going to talk, and either he is going to know how to fix it, or a coaching game is happening. Either way, stats wont be there. Why, because they cant tell you anything. Sure they can tell you that the QB is doing a good job okay when is he doing a good job? up against bad teams, up against a certain defense, or when key players are out of the defense. heres another stat i dont see, the times Dallas wont expose a weak link on their opponents. Why wont Garrett jump on that? Do the stats back him up on it?

Sorry, SS. We're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I think you couldn't be more wrong. Statistics matter, the have a hugely significant role in the NFL. Teams grade and measure players exhaustively for this very purpose and react accordingly. You're also off on what you're eyeballs are telling you, as far as my eyeballs are concerned, if that means anything to you. We're effective on offense and ineffective stopping the pass on defense, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the lack of snickers bars.

 

[ShiningStar]

Sorry, SS. We're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I think you couldn't be more wrong. Statistics matter, the have a hugely significant role in the NFL. Teams grade and measure players exhaustively for this very purpose and react accordingly. You're also off on what you're eyeballs are telling you, as far as my eyeballs are concerned, if that means anything to you. We're effective on offense and ineffective stopping the pass on defense, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the lack of snickers bars.

We can do that. But at the end of the day you won or loss on many factors, the stats wont help. Obvously Garrett has proven that, for if stats show a RB used properly would help win the game, well, hes dead set against that. If the stats show our QB sucks against a certain defense, thats not going to change our game plan. And as for reading stats, seems like the only ones we are are destined to follow is any that lead us to an 8-8 season. THis year is shaping up to be more exciting, we might go 7-9, ill be happy to hear the stats and how it helped us after the season, Should be a great conversation.

 

[Idgit]

We can do that. But at the end of the day you won or loss on many factors, the stats wont help. Obvously Garrett has proven that, for if stats show a RB used properly would help win the game, well, hes dead set against that. If the stats show our QB sucks against a certain defense, thats not going to change our game plan. And as for reading stats, seems like the only ones we are are destined to follow is any that lead us to an 8-8 season. THis year is shaping up to be more exciting, we might go 7-9, ill be happy to hear the stats and how it helped us after the season, Should be a great conversation.

To use the deck building analogy further. The stats are the measurements. They tell you where to cut or where to put the screws. They don't build you the deck. But good luck building one without measuring anything.

If the team disagrees with your preferences, it's a good bet they're measuring something you are not and using that data accordingly. It doesn't mean they're measuring the right thing, or that they're using the data they get properly, but you can bet that, whatever they're doing, it's measurable and supported by statistics. Just listening to one of Jason's press conferences should make that pretty clear.

 

[ShiningStar]

To use the deck building analogy further. The stats are the measurements. They tell you where to cut or where to put the screws. They don't build you the deck. But good luck building one without measuring anything.

If the team disagrees with your preferences, it's a good bet they're measuring something you are not and using that data accordingly. It doesn't mean they're measuring the right thing, or that they're using the data they get properly, but you can bet that, whatever they're doing, it's measurable and supported by statistics. Just listening to one of Jason's press conferences should make that pretty clear.

Why?...Is Jason still stacking good days?....heres his stat...no stat should have saved him....common sense has doomed him and this organization. ...

 

[fanfromvirginia]

There's so much grey area there that it's hard to address, and I don't think anybody's going to give you a response that will satisfy you. We played 8 games against defenses that ranked in the top half of the league in points allowed per drive, and 8 against teams that ranked in the bottom half. Since all we have to go on is the schedule that was actually played, then if we were an average offense, it stands to reason that we'd have scored about what the average team scored against these defenses.

In our 8 games against teams with defenses that ranked in the bottom half of the league in points allowed per drive, we scored 225 points on 90 drives, an average of 2.50 per drive. On average, these teams gave up 2.13 points per drive. So the Dallas offense scored 14.8% more than the rest of the NFL did against these defenses. If Dallas' offense was average, the difference should then be seen in how it performed against the better defenses it faced.

In our 8 games against teams with defenses that ranked in the top half of the league in points allowed per drive, we scored 174 points on 93 drives, an average of 1.87 points per drive. On average, these teams gave up 1.66 points per drive. So against these better defenses, Dallas scored 11.3% more than the league did. This was not an offense that beat up on the bad defenses it faced and was exposed by the good ones.

Appreciate the research and response. So it looks, at least based on this evidence, that schedule wasn't much of a factor. We did better than average. So I can, for now at least, stop trolling these threads, seeking a response.

My injury point still stands, though.