Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]point is, they don't keep stats for everything. guess all offensive linemen suck, they have no TDs, INTs, yards, OR sacks..[/QUOTE]

No, for them they keep stats like pancakes.

I don't only use stats to judge players, but come on, you can't tell me that stats aren't what get players signed. That's not to slight Portis's ability to pick up the blitz, but I saw an interview with Bugel right after they got him and he said they had no idea he could do it so well until he got there. OMG, they didn't bring Clinton in to block.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

not sure if you guys have noticed, but Gibbs, Williams and the whole Redskin framework is based on what they see players give to the team. they just don't do stat 'stars'. see what happened to Lavar. conversely, see Brunell's stats last year. you 'stats' guys are too busy playing fantasy football and not watching whats really going on in the games.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]not sure if you guys have noticed, but Gibbs, Williams and the whole Redskin framework is based on what they see players give to the team. they just don't do stat 'stars'. see what happened to Lavar. conversely, see Brunell's stats last year. you 'stats' guys are too busy playing fantasy football and not watching whats really going on in the games.[/QUOTE]

So how do you determine how good a player is?

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=Anthony Chance]Brunell has actually thrown more TDs than Plummer and Plummer has a 1 game advantage. Don't forget that Brunell was not our original starter in week 1.[/QUOTE]

Your stat, INT percentage, which is apparently the one that makes Brunell great is rather revealing. Kerry Collins is tied with Peyton Manning and Matt Hasselbeck, are you saying that he's just as good as them?

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]not sure if you guys have noticed, but Gibbs, Williams and the whole Redskin framework is based on what they see players give to the team. they just don't do stat 'stars'. see what happened to Lavar. conversely, see Brunell's stats last year. you 'stats' guys are too busy playing fantasy football and not watching whats really going on in the games.[/QUOTE]

I have never owned a fantasy team, I pay attention to the game. I am so [font='Times New Roman']obsessed with the Redskins that if I did own a fantasy team it would probably be composed of all Redskins players and on that note would not be successful. [/font]
[font='Times New Roman'][/font]
[font='Times New Roman']I could care less about stats, I guess if we were winning it would put everyone in a better mood.[/font]

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]Your stat, INT percentage, which is apparently the one that makes Brunell great is rather revealing. Kerry Collins is tied with Peyton Manning and Matt Hasselbeck, are you saying that he's just as good as them?[/QUOTE]

Kerry Collins, HA HA. However Peyton calls his own plays, I would like to see how he does in a Joe Gibbs outdated offense.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]No, for them they keep stats like pancakes.

I don't only use stats to judge players, but come on, you can't tell me that stats aren't what get players signed. That's not to slight Portis's ability to pick up the blitz, but I saw an interview with Bugel right after they got him and he said they had no idea he could do it so well until he got there. OMG, they didn't bring Clinton in to block.[/QUOTE]

is that an official stat yet? and for how long? how bout passes defensed? all relatively new 'stats' that TRY to represent someone's worth. i agree stats get you noticed, but if Portis had T.O.s attitude or work 'ethic', he wouldn't have been brought here. i suppose everyone would be happy if he made 1300+ yds a season AND the NFL made 'pancakes' a stat for running backs too. maybe then he could make the Hall of Fame.

Guess Art Monk wasn't really a great receiver.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]Guess Art Monk wasn't really a great receiver.[/QUOTE]

I'm gonna be totally honest. To steal a line from the Colbert Report: You just nailed me. I have no comeback from that one dude. Bravo.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]So how do you determine how good a player is?[/QUOTE]

simply, what they bring to the team. think any good coach would agree.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]not sure if you guys have noticed, but Gibbs, Williams and the whole Redskin framework is based on what they see players give to the team. they just don't do stat 'stars'. see what happened to Lavar. conversely, see Brunell's stats last year. you 'stats' guys are too busy playing fantasy football and not watching whats really going on in the games.[/QUOTE]



gibbs picked up moss and patten mainly because of their stats as it pertains to YARDS PER CATCH. gibbs wanted to stretch the field.gibbs quoted their stats over and over whenever he spoke about either one of them.the first thing gibbs does when he starts his "after game press conference" is give stats about the game. i'm not saying stats tell the entire story of a players ability to play the game of football but surely stats CANNOT be ignored.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]I'm gonna be totally honest. To steal a line from the Colbert Report: You just nailed me. I have no comeback from that one dude. Bravo.[/QUOTE]

ha (love that show), no props to you, for acknowledging the importance and greatness of Art Monk.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]is that an official stat yet? and for how long? how bout passes defensed? all relatively new 'stats' that TRY to represent someone's worth. i agree stats get you noticed, but if Portis had T.O.s attitude or work 'ethic', he wouldn't have been brought here. i suppose everyone would be happy if he made 1300+ yds a season AND the NFL made 'pancakes' a stat for running backs too. maybe then he could make the Hall of Fame.

Guess Art Monk wasn't really a great receiver.[/QUOTE]

I've said a few times in this thread that there are other things that make a player great and other things that I respect. However, truly great players have great stats. Monk has great stats, just the HOF voters are dicks.

I love players like Lorenzo Neal because he's one of the ultimate "team" guys. However, you can't honestly tell me that you don't use stats to judge greatness.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]gibbs picked up moss and patten mainly because of their stats as it pertains to YARDS PER CATCH. gibbs wanted to stretch the field.gibbs quoted their stats over and over whenever he spoke about either one of them.the first thing gibbs does when he starts his "after game press conference" is give stats about the game. i'm not saying stats tell the entire story of a players ability to play the game of football but surely stats CANNOT be ignored.[/QUOTE]

Stats + intangibles. Moss and Patten are Gibbs guys through and through but he doesn't expect everyone to care about that so he'll focus on the stats to the press. else again, we'd have T.O. infecting our team.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

[QUOTE=illdefined]simply, what they bring to the team. think any good coach would agree.[/QUOTE]

I stand corrected, apparently you don't.

Re: Portis Overrated?
 

The ratio of TDs to INTs is a big stat and brunell is best in the entire league in it. We SHOULD be a run first team

Brunell's yards in wins-excluding the bears game b/c he came in late- 229.8

Also if we take out the outlier of the giants with only 60 some yards brunell has averaged 245.6 in losses
The thing is 15 yards isn't gonna make any difference,


we rushed for 158 per game in wins and in losses just 122 (excluding that darn NY game)

We should run good to win and all we need is a QB that doesn't turn the ball over