wackywabbit Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 45 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Dumbass, Everybody knows the Ravens and the Browns played twice in 2018. They're in the same division. I just assumed you were bright enough to not need that explained to you. Shame on me for giving you too much credit. Obviously Watt has been more effective against the Ravens. The point being argued against wasn't that. It was your flawed argument that Garrett hasn't done anything against the Ravens. When you have two sacks and three QB hits against a team in a year (even if it is two games) that's definitely doing something. I still don't see 2 sacks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webmaster Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 1 hour ago, diamondbull424 said: I will show you how foolish you look here 58 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Dumbass Drop the insults now. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 15 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: I still don't see 2 sacks... Here you go!!! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) You get a like, just because that second gif is hilarious. I stand by the point that Watt has been the much better/more disruptive player in Ravens games and in other random divisional games I've payed attention to. Edited April 13, 2020 by wackywabbit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 2 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: You get a like, just because that second gif is hilarious. I stand by the point that Watt has been the much better/more disruptive player in Ravens games and in other random divisional games I've payed attention to. Nobody's arguing that. The argument being made is whether it's true Garrett does nothing against the Ravens. Garrett tilts the field just being there, but it's not like there's no statistical production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Dumbass, Everybody knows the Ravens and the Browns played twice in 2018. They're in the same division. I just assumed you were bright enough to not need that explained to you. Shame on me for giving you too much credit. Obviously Watt has been more effective against the Ravens. The point being argued against wasn't that. It was your flawed argument that Garrett hasn't done anything against the Ravens. When you have two sacks and three QB hits against a team in a year (even if it is two games) that's definitely doing something. 1. Language, this a web forum and I won’t have someone cursing at me because they post stats without any context as to why they’re posting them. 2. Name me where I stated that Garrett had zero impact against the Ravens? I stated he’s had minimal impact... especially in comparison to Watt, that’s completely true and my stat breakdown shows just that. 3. None of the things you found to be obvious in your retort were in fact obvious, as again it included absolutely no context as to what your goal was in posting the stats. You simply posted Garrett’s stats as if that somehow trumped my point that Watt was by far the more impressive player in games against both rival teams. 4. While everyone knows they played twice, you again did not post that your stats were over two games of 2018 or just one game in 2018. For one game Garrett as one of the top pass rushers in the NFL having a game with 1.5 sacks would be indeed incredibly impressive. Over two games? That’s 12 sacks on the season if averaged out. That would’ve tied him for 16th in the NFL in 2018. So it’s still impressive, but it’s not at all special, especially when we consider that he had little impact outside of those sacks. I mean 1 tackle/game? That’s not significant production by any metric. 5. So perhaps the solution is to post further context as then my response would’ve detailed how your response was a strawman argument due to the fact that I never stated Garrett had no impact. I simply compared how his impact was minimal in comparison to Watt’s which is accurate. Like if I say, Larry Fitzgerald is no where near the level of Jerry Rice in career impact, that wouldn’t be the same as saying Larry Fitzgerald was not an impactful receiver. Someone making such a claim would be building a strawman. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 29 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Nobody's arguing that. The argument being made is whether it's true Garrett does nothing against the Ravens. Garrett tilts the field just being there, but it's not like there's no statistical production. Nope. That’s the strawman that YOU are arguing. Let’s be clear. I have never stated any such thing. And you will not disrespect my argument by putting words onto it never stated. Again, Larry Fitzgerald vs Jerry Rice... Fitz’s career was not nearly as impactful as Rice does not mean Fitz was not impactful. Stating Watt has made much more impact against the Ravens than Garrett is not analogous to Garrett sucks and is a scrub.... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 hour ago, diamondbull424 said: Nope. That’s the strawman that YOU are arguing. Let’s be clear. I have never stated any such thing. And you will not disrespect my argument by putting words onto it never stated. Again, Larry Fitzgerald vs Jerry Rice... Fitz’s career was not nearly as impactful as Rice does not mean Fitz was not impactful. Stating Watt has made much more impact against the Ravens than Garrett is not analogous to Garrett sucks and is a scrub.... Your exact words, "Garrett's impact was largely erased". That is a false statement 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 38 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Your exact words, "Garrett's impact was largely erased". That is a false statement Nope. “Garrett’s impact is largely erased” is “exactly” what I said... and yes I’m being a stickler here very intentionally because you’re now trying the second classic example of what to do when losing an argument... you failed at the strawman attempt and thus are now switching it to the classic “semantics” debate so as to build up a foundation to reestablish your strawman. It won’t work. Garrets impact being “largely erased” does not mean the same thing as “he is not impactful” in games; 0.375 sacks in his career vs my club would equal out to a grand total of 6 sacks on the season extrapolated over 16 games. If that were his production on the season he would’ve tied for 51st (2017), 55th (2018), and 58th (2019) place in sack production. Considering his production against the rest of the league in the games he’s played, most would agree that his superstar impact when playing against the Ravens has been “largely erased”. He’s a stud pass rusher so there’s only so much you can do, but if any team is holding Garrett to those numbers and only 1 tackle in the game... most would say they’ve done a great job against him. In terms of Watt and his impact in comparison, he’s only averaging roughly 7 sacks, but my point from the beginning was that even if you erase him from the game in getting sacks, he’s finding other ways to impact the game be it TFL, FFs, PDs, solo tackles, etc. Watt going off feels inevitable no matter how great your gameplan, the same has not been the case with Garrett. With a great gameplan in place his impact on the game is much easier to contain because he lacks the same versatility, hustle, and football instincts as Watt. Lastly there’s no greater ability than availability and for one reason or another Garrett hasn’t been as available as Watt either. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronsWitness Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 ***Checks the poll stats Yup that sounds about right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 hour ago, diamondbull424 said: Garrets impact being “largely erased” does not mean the same thing as “he is not impactful” in games Lol, this seems like a silly thing to argue over. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Your exact words, "Garrett's impact was largely erased". That is a false statement Why is that false? I mean, it looks like he got one sack when the LT didn't even try to block (looks like Stanley wan't aware the play started)*. If that's all he did in 4 games, I'd call that largely erased. Granted, you can have an impact and be disruptive without sacks, but I don't really remember him being that disruptive in those particular games. * For that first gif, I think giving #95 half a sack for that is more than generous, I'm not even sure he touched Flacco before he was down. Edited April 13, 2020 by wackywabbit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 33 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: Why is that false? I mean, it looks like he got one sack when the LT didn't even try to block (looks like Stanley wan't aware the play started)*. If that's all he did in 4 games, I'd call that largely erased. Granted, you can have an impact and be disruptive without sacks, but I don't really remember him being that disruptive in those particular games. * For that first gif, I think giving #95 half a sack for that is more than generous, I'm not even sure he touched Flacco before he was down. Garrett definitely touched Flacco before he was down, if the other guy hadn't been there it was still likely a sack. He was also the one taking on the pulling lineman and the RB so that the other defender could get a pretty free rush against a dazed and confused TE. For the second one, you can obviously knock the degree of difficulty, but to say it wasn't impactful is wrong. That sack killed a two minute drive and moved you guys out of field goal range. You really have to watch the games with your eyes specifically on Garrett to really appreciate everything the Ravens do to account for him, especially when he's rushing over the RT. They do a ton to bother him and his get off with their backs and TEs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, Yin-Yang said: Lol, this seems like a silly thing to argue over. Did you mean to quote @AlexGreen#20 I’m guessing? Otherwise I’m confused as to what exactly is deemed silly from what I have stated on my end. Would need further explanation. Edited April 13, 2020 by diamondbull424 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 48 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said: Did you mean to quote @AlexGreen#20 I’m guessing? Otherwise I’m confused as to what exactly is deemed silly from what I have stated on my end. Would need further explanation. Because in any other conversation - other than this extremely literal one, where we’re going as far as differentiating “was largely erased” and “is largely erased” - the two quotes from the other post are pretty synonymous Not even disagreeing with you, lol. Just looking at the stats (not remembering all those games), it certainly appears that Garrett’s impact was minimal. Granted players can affect games without doing so on the stat sheet, but that’s neither here nor there. You backed up what you said statistically, no need to go on a technicality debate. And for the record, I’m guilty of this all the time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts