Receiver Arithmetic - Spreading It Out

[Deus Irae]

Gotcha.

So my claim isn't what I say it is.

It's what YOU say it is.

No, your claim is what you posted, and I quoted:

So if anyone wants to make the point that "Better Statistics = More Wins", they'd be dead wrong.

This is basic stuff. You're arguing against yourself at this point, and losing. You made a claim you shouldn't have. It happens. You should have just walked it back a bit. Instead, you doubled down and now you look silly. Just let it die.

 

[JoeSixPat]

No, your claim is what you posted, and I quoted:

This is basic stuff. You're arguing against yourself at this point, and losing. You made a claim you shouldn't have. It happens. You should have just walked it back a bit. Instead, you doubled down and now you look silly. Just let it die.

There's nothing to argue about - for the record:

2009 Tom Brady Stats: 371 Completions, 4398 Yards - Team Record, 10-6

2010 Tom Brady Stats: 324 Completions, 3900 Yards - Team Record, 14-2

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm

Try not to get so caught up on yards and completions. Focus on points scored and wins. You'll enjoy the games more.

 

[supafly]

In 2012, the Patriots had more offensive snaps than any team in history, due to the hurry up offense they ran. It was not a function of being committed to running the ball.

That isn't close to true, Nunchucks.

On average the hurry up offense produced approximately 2-3 more plays per quarter, or roughly 10 extra plays per game. Let's not discredit NE's commitment to the running game last year because of an extra 2-3 plays per quarter. They had the 2nd most attempts in the league last season, so that number may have fallen out of the top 5 had it not been for the hurry up, but it definitely would have remained in the top 6-8 teams in the league as far as rushing attempts.

I agree, Brady is the most potent weapon on the offense. That doesn't mean he doesn't need help. The Patriots won Superbowls when the offense was complimentary, not a one sided beast like the Peyton Manning led Colts.

No one is claiming that we want to see a "one sided beast" like Peyton Manning. The Patriots have always been commited to specific gameplanning tendencies based on the weaknesses of the opponent. We saw a run heavy scheme in the opener vs TEN, and they jammed the ball down Peyton Manning and the Broncos' throats in game 5.

There will be plenty of opportunities to see more run heavy gameplans involved, and of course we'd all like to see it in the late season and playoffs--IF they can do it effectively on a consistent enough basis of course.

The problem has been that they've been ineffective when it counts, and we've seen that 2x vs a nickel scheme in the NYJ and BAL playoff losses. The more effective they are, the more they'll continue to use it and other teams will have to respect it, but this whole conversation was started due to you wanting to see a "50/50" split--which isn't going to happen over the entire course of a season, at least not in the next couple/few yrs.

I'm sure that it was more than obvious to Belichick, Brady and everyone involved that running the ball effectively would take BAL out of their nickel defense. Sadly that did not happen, but that's a different conversation altogether, and one that's been had now many times.

The debate here is whether or not we'll see anything more than the 55/45 split that we saw last year. I do think they have potential to bring it a tad closer but I don't think anyone is going to see a 50/50 split for the entire season. You may feel differently.

 

[Nunchucks]

That is 160 plays for the season, many of them rushing plays, because that is the best time to run the ball. Do not minimize 160 plays please.

I do not want to see the Patriots go to a 50/50 ratio, I just want them to run more than they do now and in different situations, so teams have to prepare to defend against the run.

 

[Brady6]

My "claim" is that the from 2009 - 2011 the Patriots least productive passing season was also the season that they had the most wins.

The thing is, what you call a claim is actually a fact.

That fact gets in the way of those who would claim that fewer passing yards means fewer wins.

I know you like to argue for the sake of arguing - asserting your belief that the OP is being far too optimistic, for example - but on this one you just need to give it up. It's a fact.

IMO 2010-2011 was Brady's best season. 39/4 TD/INT

 

[JoeSixPat]

IMO 2010-2011 was Brady's best season. 39/4 TD/INT

I'd say so too - but the context here is a focus on passing yards. (also, the 4 INTs came in 2010, not 2011 - Brady threw 12 INTs in his 5235 yards that season)

2010 saw one of the most efficient offenses we've seen 36 TDs and just 3900 passing yards, compared to 2011's 39 TDs on 5235 passing yards (nearly as many TDs with 1300 fewer passing yards)

Only 2007 was more efficient with a 16-0 record (and 11 more TDs) on 400 fewer yards than in 2010-2011

I'll take wins over yards every time - and I think most Patsfans would agree with me.

I understand that many are worried they are going to see a drop in passing this season. I too expect a drop - but I'm not worried and don't necessarilly expect that will mean more losses - and in fact I think they could go further in the playoffs.

Still, count me among those who wants to see someone step up as a legitimate deep threat - not because I'm concerned about more yards - but because I want to see more wins!

 

[supafly]

I do not want to see the Patriots go to a 50/50 ratio, I just want them to run more than they do now and in different situations, so teams have to prepare to defend against the run.

We'd definitely be in agreement then.

They're going to have to run it more effectively, especially when teams line up in nickel formations the entire game and dare them to do so.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I just hope either the TEs can stay healthy..or they get a #1 WR somehow. It would be a shame to waste 1 of bradys years with the current WR situation.

 

[Brady6]

I'd say so too - but the context here is a focus on passing yards. (also, the 4 INTs came in 2010, not 2011 - Brady threw 12 INTs in his 5235 yards that season)

2010 saw one of the most efficient offenses we've seen 36 TDs and just 3900 passing yards, compared to 2011's 39 TDs on 5235 passing yards (nearly as many TDs with 1300 fewer passing yards)

Only 2007 was more efficient with a 16-0 record (and 11 more TDs) on 400 fewer yards than in 2010-2011

I'll take wins over yards every time - and I think most Patsfans would agree with me.

I understand that many are worried they are going to see a drop in passing this season. I too expect a drop - but I'm not worried and don't necessarilly expect that will mean more losses - and in fact I think they could go further in the playoffs.

Still, count me among those who wants to see someone step up as a legitimate deep threat - not because I'm concerned about more yards - but because I want to see more wins!

I was referring to 2010-2011 season in which he had 3900 yards 36 touchdowns, 4 interceptions and a 111% rating with Branch (returning from Seattle after 4 years) Welker (coming off major offseason knee surgery) and Brandon Tate, 2 rookie tight ends (Gronkowski/Hernandez) and a backfield with 2 UDFA (Green Ellis/Woodhead). That's is an awful offense and Brady went out won an MVP and had one of the best season by a QB ever.

The players we will send out this year look like a pro bowl roster compared to that group.

 

[ausbacker]

IMO 2010-2011 was Brady's best season. 39/4 TD/INT

I liked his 2006 season given the JAGs who were forced upon him.