Brunell vs. Bledsoe

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Huddle

Nice try ...but you have only added further claims to the original. You've proven nothing.

First: You're wrong. He did not add further claims to his original statement. He made statements which support and provide a basis for the original claim. Given your stance on the use of "mostly useless" statistics to "prove" a point, your earlier invitation for him to prove his statement relying on statistics is disengenous at best.

He has made a claim: Brooks is the best QB. He then supports it by asserting that Brooks excels at those things that good QB's need to do. Simply b/c he did not support his assertion in the manner you have asked him to does not mean he hasn't offered support. Can you disprove any of his supporting assertions and, thus, call into question his final conclusion?

What must he provide as a basis for support of his claim? Accepting your theory that stats are mostly useless, any use of stats will inevitably fail.
The circular nature of your argument is truly amazing: You assert stats are mostly useless for providing a comparison of players. Then assert someone has not proven their point b/c they have not relied on stats to compare the player to others.

IF, instead, it is your position that, as he is arguing that stats are important and valuable comparisons, he must provide a statistical basis for his position re: Aaron Brooks, THEN you have failed to grasp the point of the statement or are deliberately failing to answer it.

The statement that "Brooks is the best QB" was not made as an assertion of the truth, but, rather, as a demonstration that, w/o the use of or reliance on stats, such statements are simply a matter of unsupported opinion. In the common use of the english language, opinions unsupported by facts are know as either bias, when asserting opinion in favor of something, and prejudice, when asserting opinion against something.

As the statement was made not as a truth to be proven, but rather to demonstrate the impossiblity of your position (that stats are mostly useless), the burden falls upon you to demonstrate, in an objective fashion, w/out any reliance on stats, that it can be disproven. Please do so.

[Huddle]

JoeRedskin

First: You're wrong. He did not add further claims to his original statement. He made statements which support and provide a basis for the original claim.

He made a claim. The burden of proof is his to prove that claim. Did what you are generously labelling "supporting statements" prove anything? No. They were just additional unsupported claims.

Given your stance on the use of "mostly useless" statistics to "prove" a point, your earlier invitation for him to prove his statement relying on statistics is disengenous at best.

Why disingenuous? He thinks he can prove something with stats not me.

He has made a claim: Brooks is the best QB. He then supports it by asserting that Brooks excels at those things that good QB's need to do. Simply b/c he did not support his assertion in the manner you have asked him to does not mean he hasn't offered support.

Let him support it anyway he wants to. I don't care. But I'm asking for him to prove his claim not for additional unsupported claims.

Can you disprove any of his supporting assertions and, thus, call into question his final conclusion?

I don't have to. It's his claim not mine.

What must he provide as a basis for support of his claim? Accepting your theory that stats are mostly useless, any use of stats will inevitably fail.

His proof is his problem. Yes, it obvious to me that he'll fail but I can't help it if the facts aren't on his side.

The circular nature of your argument is truly amazing: You assert stats are mostly useless for providing a comparison of players. Then assert someone has not proven their point b/c they have not relied on stats to compare the player to others.

Strawman. Quote please. Where did I make that assertion?

IF, instead, it is your position that, as he is arguing that stats are important and valuable comparisons, he must provide a statistical basis for his position re: Aaron Brooks, THEN you have failed to grasp the point of the statement or are deliberately failing to answer it.

Maybe I wrote something that has given you the wrong impression. Where did you get the idea that I'm making statistical proof of his claim a requirement? I don't care how he proves his claim.

[That Guy]

so huddle you agree brooks is the best QB in the league? if not why not?

you know you can't disprove it so you ignore the request. way to go, but you lose.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Huddle

Maybe I wrote something that has given you the wrong impression. Where did you get the idea that I'm making statistical proof of his claim a requirement? I don't care how he proves his claim.

Post 120:

Assigning no or "almost no" value to statistics, however, makes it impossible to support any argument about any player. Let's see how this works: My Statement: Aaron Brooks is the best QB in the league. Prove me wrong, Huddle.

Originally Posted by Huddle

The burden of proof is on the claimant. The Aaron Brooks claim is yours to prove. When you try to do it with statistics, I'll simply argue that your stats are worthless and give you reasons.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Huddle

His proof is his problem. Yes, it obvious to me that he'll fail but I can't help it if the facts aren't on his side.

And what, pray tell, are the "facts" you are referring to? Please tell me the "facts" upon which you rely to support your affirmative statement that "he'll fail".

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Huddle

Maybe I wrote something that has given you the wrong impression. Where did you get the idea that I'm making statistical proof of his claim a requirement? I don't care how he proves his claim.

HOW do you suggest he prove his claim without stats.

oh sage master, please explain how its possible, so far you've been adamant in shooting other people down, now show us how you prove things without stats and without opinions (as you've shot down BOTH already).

[JoeRedskin]

As for the rest of your statements, I'll sum up as you have, yet again displayed your obtuseness or idiocy.

You have made the affirmative claim that stats are mostly useless for comparing players. In refuting that claim, PSU has asked you to refute the statement that Aaron Brooks is the best QB in the league w/out relying on stats.

No one on this forum believes that statement to be true, and, thus, it is on you to disprove an obviouslly false statement w/out relying on facts.