AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 1 hour ago, Thomas5737 said: You'll notice that if one side is more objective that the other side will do the same. If one side sticks to their guns and won't speak objectively the other side usually won't either and it becomes "this is a flaw" "no it isn't" "exaggeration" "exaggeration" and nothing gets accomplished and there is no meaningful conversation. Also calling those that don't agree with what you feel "ignorant morons" also doesn't help move the conversation along. I'm just saying, I just had to correct a post where someone argued that Lamar improved the Ravens run game by 20 yards per game in 2018. It's just such hideously bad analysis that the person can only be described as an ignorant moron. Either they are stupid or trolling. I can't fathom any other possibility. I don't see any Ravens fans making outlandish, false claims in these forums, and I won't condone it if they do. But a lot of effort has to be spent correcting people who make ridiculously stupid points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas5737 Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said: I'm just saying, I just had to correct a post where someone argued that Lamar improved the Ravens run game by 20 yards per game in 2018. It's just such hideously bad analysis that the person can only be described as an ignorant moron. Either they are stupid or trolling. I can't fathom any other possibility. I don't see any Ravens fans making outlandish, false claims in these forums, and I won't condone it if they do. But a lot of effort has to be spent correcting people who make ridiculously stupid points. No, he said total yards per game and you just didn't read it correctly so he isn't an ignorant moron you just misread what was said. I mean he could call you an ignorant moron because that was your fault but are you an ignorant moron? If not you should apologize to that guy or else you are calling yourself an ignorant moron. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said: I'm just saying, I just had to correct a post where someone argued that Lamar improved the Ravens run game by 20 yards per game in 2018. It's just such hideously bad analysis that the person can only be described as an ignorant moron. Either they are stupid or trolling. I can't fathom any other possibility. You actually misread his post… Edited September 19, 2021 by Yin-Yang 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: You actually misread his post… Uh, how so? He claimed "Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." That's blatantly false. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said: Uh, how so? He claimed "Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." That's blatantly false. Week 1-9: 366.55 TYPG Week 11-17: 385.71 TYPG You shouldn’t call people ignorant morons. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 4 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: Week 1-9: 366.55 TYPG Week 11-17: 385.71 TYPG You shouldn’t call people ignorant morons. Ah I see, he was saying Lamar slightly improved the run game, and they improved only 20 yards per game. He did not specify total yards per game as you did. The quote: "I'll give him some credit for improving the run game - Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." Usually information after the dash refers to the information before the dash. Grammatically, he should have started a new sentence if he didn't want the second clause to refer to the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 (edited) 1 minute ago, AngusMcFife said: He did not specify total yards per game as you did. I mean… Quote "I'll give him some credit for improving the run game - Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." Edited September 19, 2021 by Yin-Yang 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: I mean… Separating "total" from YPG instead of TYPG is not clear at all, especially since the clause is referring to improving the run game. Edited September 19, 2021 by AngusMcFife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 Just now, AngusMcFife said: Separating total from YPG instead of TYPG is not clear at all, especially since the clause is referring to improving the run game. TYPG Total YPG Different meanings? Shrug. Still shouldn’t call people ignorant morons. Probably why the things being said about fan bases are being said in the first place, but that talk’s not allowed here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 41 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said: No, he said total yards per game and you just didn't read it correctly so he isn't an ignorant moron you just misread what was said. I mean he could call you an ignorant moron because that was your fault but are you an ignorant moron? If not you should apologize to that guy or else you are calling yourself an ignorant moron. Actually I read it fine, it was a poorly constructed sentence. "I'll give him some credit for improving the run game - Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." Information after the dash refers directly to what comes before it. If he wanted to make a statement about TYPG then using a dash there makes no sense. If he wanted to use the stat TYPG then he should have used that acronym. But to separate the word total from the stat suggests that "total" is not part of the stat, but refers to the information before the dash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: TYPG Total YPG Different meanings? Shrug. Still shouldn’t call people ignorant morons. Probably why the things being said about fan bases are being said in the first place, but that talk’s not allowed here. Yes they are different meanings when they are coming after the dash, because everything after the dash directly refers to what comes before it. If he wanted to use the stat TYPG that would have been clearer, or if he used a period and started a new sentence that would have been clearer. Separating "total" from YPG suggests he is referring to rushing totals, because that's what the first clause is referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 It is curious that the original argument was that Lamar was "objectively bad" in 2018 when he: - Replaced a QB (Flacco) performing at an above average level (5.4% DVOA) - Improved the offense (objectively, by TYPG) - Only lost 1 game in OT to the Chiefs. Calling his performance objectively bad is still poor analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 5 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said: Actually I read it fine, it was a poorly constructed sentence. "I'll give him some credit for improving the run game - Ravens as a team improved about ~20 total YPG after he took over." Information after the dash refers directly to what comes before it. If he wanted to make a statement about TYPG then using a dash there makes no sense. If he wanted to use the stat TYPG then he should have used that acronym. But to separate the word total from the stat suggests that "total" is not part of the stat, but refers to the information before the dash. You’re actually still misunderstanding. They are related. My point was that I will give credit for him improving the running game as evidenced by it’s effect on the teams offense. We wouldn’t use only rushing totals because it’s understood the passing game suffered that year under Lamar, so we look at the net effect on the offense. We also understood the Ravens got better running but that’s the Tim Tebow argument unless it outweighs the negatives in passing. Therefore, it only makes sense to look at TYPG and I’ll give him credit for making them ~20 YPG better. No sarcasm I actually specifically typed out total because I didn’t want it to get misconstrued as I figured “total” would be harder to miss than “T”, but alas I was wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said: It is curious that the original argument was that Lamar was "objectively bad" in 2018 when he: - Replaced a QB (Flacco) performing at an above average level (5.4% DVOA) - Improved the offense (objectively, by TYPG) - Only lost 1 game in OT to the Chiefs. Calling his performance objectively bad is still poor analysis. We will just have to agree to disagree buddy. I’ve already derailed this thread enough and I like Lamar (I have him top 7-8 I think without looking) so I’m not really trying to argue it. Just struck me as an odd statement considering Lamars whole narrative year 2 was how he proved everyone wrong who criticized his bad rookie year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMcFife Posted September 19, 2021 Share Posted September 19, 2021 7 minutes ago, Soggust said: You’re actually still misunderstanding. They are related. My point was that I will give credit for him improving the running game as evidenced by it’s effect on the teams offense. We wouldn’t use only rushing totals because it’s understood the passing game suffered that year under Lamar, so we look at the net effect on the offense. We also understood the Ravens got better running but that’s the Tim Tebow argument unless it outweighs the negatives in passing. Therefore, it only makes sense to look at TYPG and I’ll give him credit for making them ~20 YPG better. No sarcasm I actually specifically typed out total because I didn’t want it to get misconstrued as I figured “total” would be harder to miss than “T”, but alas I was wrong. Thank you for your reasonable response. It is curious though that you found Lamar to be "objectively bad" when you acknowledge that he improved an offense that, prior to him starting, was about average. Wouldn't it have gotten worse if he was objectively bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.