Ohrnberger

[Deus Irae]

And no one would expect the team to be better with backups playing.
But the record is relevant. First because if his play didn't cost us games, what is the relevance of the dropoff, and second because winning matters more than points scored.
The running game was almost exactly the same. The pass proection was almost exactly the same. You are hung up on a magic # of more than 21 being good and 20 or 21 being bad. Thats silly, and thats 2/3 of your point argument. I will accept that Connlly could be the difference between 22 and 20 or 21 points, as I already indicated we socred about a FG less.
The other 1/3 of your argument was the Buffalo game in the blizzard when we ran 34 times and passed 23 completing 11. That is an anomoly.




Ease f comparison is not the same as accuracy.
I agree your way is easier, I wouldnt have to go look and see if he actually played 1 play or 80.
My way is more accurate in depicting his play.
I wasn't debating which stats were easier to accumulate, I was debating which stats were more representative of his play.








And I consider when the backup RG is in, and we win 4 of 5, the running game is identically productive, the pass blocking is identically productive, and we score 3 points less per game, to be a fine result for having my backuip on the field.

Hell, we were 6-5 in the game he didnt play the majority of the snaps.

Exactly what is it that suffered?

Instead of pretending to have a point other than "I think he played better than you think he did", why not just post that and be done with it? Your attempts to massage the data failed miserably, so leave it at that.

You accuse me of being difficult, yet you were the one playing games with the rushing game, for crying out loud. Neal's the best run blocker on the team, you went for the running game as your argument, and you think you're making anything approaching a sensible argument?

Sheesh!

 

[Ring 6]

I'm not being difficult at all. I pointed out problems with trying to evaluate an individual player without a large enough data set, and I noted that the very season you are pointing to had a high scoring snow game.

Basic stuff

Wrong. You are evaluating the player based almost solely on whether the team scored more than 21 points.
The running game was identical, the pass protection was identical, and the knock you have is that the team, instead of 22, scored 21,20,17. You are ignoring the inpact of weather on the sole factor, which is flawed to begin with.

If you were talking about evaluating a signle player, why is 59-0 even posted?

Hey I can agree to disagree, but you grasping at straws to eliminate any point that differs from your original position isn't worth my time.
You are smater than that.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wrong. You are evaluating the player based almost solely on whether the team scored more than 21 points.
The running game was identical, the pass protection was identical, and the knock you have is that the team, instead of 22, scored 21,20,17. You are ignoring the inpact of weather on the sole factor, which is flawed to begin with.

If you were talking about evaluating a signle player, why is 59-0 even posted?

Hey I can agree to disagree, but you grasping at straws to eliminate any point that differs from your original position isn't worth my time.
You are smater than that.

Now you are flat-out lying.

1.) YOU pointed to the scoring and the YPA, not me.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/349710-ohrnberger.html#post1855555

I responded to what YOU had done.

2.) YOU pointed to weather as a factor in scoring, not me

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/349710-ohrnberger.html#post1855592

Again, I responded to what YOU had done.


You have made false accusations, and you're now just blatantly lying, yet you claim I'm the one grasping at straws?

Look, I've suggested repeatedly that you ignore my posts. I can't ignore yours because you're a mod. I'll ask you once again, since you can't be bothered to post in an honest manner, to please ignore my posts. After this, all my reponses to you will be a cut/past of this final paragraph.

 

[Ring 6]

Instead of pretending to have a point other than "I think he played better than you think he did", why not just post that and be done with it? Your attempts to massage the data failed miserably, so leave it at that.

You accuse me of being difficult, yet you were the one playing games with the rushing game, for crying out loud. Neal's the best run blocker on the team, you went for the running game as your argument, and you think you're making anything approaching a sensible argument?

Sheesh!

I didnt massage the data. I found it.
Do you have any interest at all in the facts?

See heres the difference. I went to ASSESS the difference in the team.
I used the games he played the most in. I purposely left out the 3 games he played 20-25 snaps each (basially would have included 90 of his snaps)because they distorted the argument IN MY FAVOR and would have been disingenuous.
Your argument amounts to draw a line at 22 in order to call 21 and 20 bad. It is disingenuous.

I didn't choose the running game to support my point, I used it in my analysis.

If Neal is our best run blocker and we put in Connolly and run for a couple more yards per game and 0.1 less per carry, how can that possibly not be an indication that Connolly must have done a decent job run blocking?

Instead you focus on less consequental facts that supprt your initial impresion rather than considering the data. Then you act as if they are the ones that matter.

If you seriously think that the best way to judge a backup G is to add up the points his offense scored by calling 22-99999 good, and equal, and 0-21 bad and equal and that the answer to the impact of weather on scoring in a football game is one high scoring game, then you should go open up DeusIraefans.com and post all day back and forth with yourself.

Of course you are being difficult.
You ignore every point that contends with your predetermined opinion, and focus on ones that are of minor importance.
Why have a discussion if the only reason to have it is being defensive that your first thought had to be correct?

Did you realize that the running game was virtually identical with Connolly in there? That we gave up no more sacks than normal?
I would assume you didn't because instead of using that data to reshape your opinion you swept it under the carpet.

Hey if thats why you are here, to be defensive and refuse to accept anythng any other person posts the refutes your preconceived opinion, tell me, and I will save the effort.

 

[Deus Irae]

I didnt massage the data. I found it.
Do you have any interest at all in the facts?

See heres the difference. I went to ASSESS the difference in the team.
I used the games he played the most in. I purposely left out the 3 games he played 20-25 snaps each (basially would have included 90 of his snaps)because they distorted the argument IN MY FAVOR and would have been disingenuous.
Your argument amounts to draw a line at 22 in order to call 21 and 20 bad. It is disingenuous.

I didn't choose the running game to support my point, I used it in my analysis.

If Neal is our best run blocker and we put in Connolly and run for a couple more yards per game and 0.1 less per carry, how can that possibly not be an indication that Connolly must have done a decent job run blocking?

Instead you focus on less consequental facts that supprt your initial impresion rather than considering the data. Then you act as if they are the ones that matter.

If you seriously think that the best way to judge a backup G is to add up the points his offense scored by calling 22-99999 good, and equal, and 0-21 bad and equal and that the answer to the impact of weather on scoring in a football game is one high scoring game, then you should go open up DeusIraefans.com and post all day back and forth with yourself.

Of course you are being difficult.
You ignore every point that contends with your predetermined opinion, and focus on ones that are of minor importance.
Why have a discussion if the only reason to have it is being defensive that your first thought had to be correct?

Did you realize that the running game was virtually identical with Connolly in there? That we gave up no more sacks than normal?
I would assume you didn't because instead of using that data to reshape your opinion you swept it under the carpet.

Hey if thats why you are here, to be defensive and refuse to accept anythng any other person posts the refutes your preconceived opinion, tell me, and I will save the effort.

Look, I've suggested repeatedly that you ignore my posts. I can't ignore yours because you're a mod. I'll ask you once again, since you can't be bothered to post in an honest manner, to please ignore my posts. After this, all my reponses to you will be a cut/past of this final paragraph.

 

[Ring 6]

Now you are flat-out lying.

1.) YOU pointed to the scoring and the YPA, not me. .

I listed ALL of the stats that were significant.
You chose to only consider whether the team scored 0-21 or 22-99


[/quote]I responded to what YOU had done..[/quote]

Yes by ignoring what didnt support your preconceivied notions.
I LISTED ALL the stats, you picked and chose.

.

2.) YOU pointed to weather as a factor in scoring, not me.

Because it is relevant. You dismised it not because it should be dismissed bu because it got in your way.

You have made false accusations, and you're now just blatantly lying, yet you claim I'm the one grasping at straws?

Get a grip, this isnt Watergate.
FACTS are the running game and pass protection were statistically as close to identically as it gets, so you deflected to something else, while ignoring the other factors that could affect it. [/quote]
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/349710-ohrnberger.html#post1855592

Look, I've suggested repeatedly that you ignore my posts. I can't ignore yours because you're a mod. I'll ask you once again, since you can't be bothered to post in an honest manner, to please ignore my posts. After this, all my reponses to you will be a cut/past of this final paragraph.

And I will choose whether or not I want to respond to your posts. In fact without quoting you responded to mine in this thread.
Give it a rest with the 'boohoo you arent honest' crap.
Why does it always have to follow this pattern?
You make a preconcevied opinion, the facts don't support it. You twist to irrelevant facts, then get all offended. Cry me a freakin river.
If you are going to act as arrogant as you do on this board, the least you can do is accept when you are clearly wrong. You insult yourself when you wont and then turn into such a crybaby.

Case in point.

The running game and pass protection when Connolly played was almost statistically identicall to when he didnt.
Agree or disagree?

See you will do neither, because you don't like that its true and refutes your uniformed initial opinion, but you know its correct so you can't disagree. What do you do when it gets to that? Cry.

 

[Deus Irae]

I listed ALL of the stats that were significant.
You chose to only consider whether the team scored 0-21 or 22-99.......

Look, I've suggested repeatedly that you ignore my posts. I can't ignore yours because you're a mod. I'll ask you once again, since you can't be bothered to post in an honest manner, to please ignore my posts. After this, all my reponses to you will be a cut/past of this final paragraph.

 

[Ring 6]

Look, I've suggested repeatedly that you ignore my posts. I can't ignore yours because you're a mod. I'll ask you once again, since you can't be bothered to post in an honest manner, to please ignore my posts. After this, all my reponses to you will be a cut/past of this final paragraph.

I am seriously ready to just quit this board.
Dude, you ruin it. You inject your arrgoant opinion into every thread. You are purposely insulting in at least half of those15,000 posts you have time to write. You defllect the discussion so that you have to be responded to.
Any fact that contradicts your preconceived opinion you ignore or twist. Then when you are disagreed with you turn into crybaby.

I don't come here for this.

I can't imagine I will post here any more because you never leave, inject yourself in every discussion and ultimately nothing can be discussed without having to deal with your personality disorder.

I'm going to take my ball and go home, because solely due to you, this place now sucks.