[hooskins]

[QUOTE=freddyg12;789877]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Making qualitative arguments are great and all, but you use the quantitative to back up specific points. Completely ignoring statistics is loser talk. Providing critical feedback and counter quantitative figures is what d-hall advocates should do. I haven't seen anything substantial yet. Or anyone really reply to Gtripps last post.

I would love to see Hall change and improve next year, but his track record shows nothing to indicate he will.[/QUOTE]

By no means take this as a vote of confidence for Hall, just want to address your statements:

1) I think those that support him have pointed out why, if you want "quantitative figures" Hall actually had them in 2010: INTs (6), TDs (2) & fumble recoveries (at least 1). I understand your statement, but remember that Hall made a pro bowl on the basis of "quantitative figures," not being a complete, every play corner. btw, he can add pro bowl MVP to his resume too.

2) I agree, I would love to see him gamble less, play every down strategically & make the mundane play that stops drives, like tackling a reciever on a quick slant short of the marker, making the qb throw to his check down due to tight coverage, etc. I have to say though, that he has improved in attitude greatly over the years from what I can tell. Sure, he still runs his mouth, but the fact that he became a captain was a big step for him. He is less "MeAngelo" than before, so I have some guarded optimism that he can still improve his game.

Overall, he is hard to evaluate, so I won't get caught up in #s that can be debated either way. I myself find it hard to label him. If I'm Jim Hassell I make it a priority to get more out of him.

1) see my previous post. I think the picks, tds, etc. are a result of law of averages panning out. Just because those numbers are high, doesn't mean there a real change in trend. Just like how you can hit black 10 times in a row a casino, but the probability of black is still a bit below 500. In the short run results can be erradic, but after the sample size is increased dhall will return to being dhall. No consistent change from him.

2)Agree with your agreement.