At no point did I say that I didn't "want to use analytics in any form in life". I use them all the time. I run marketing for a busy law firm in a well-populated state (I mean, I'm not doing that right now, because I'm on here). I use metrics and analytics every day. I'm questioning, for one, the validity of the numbers often given here. Further, I'm saying that these highly questionable numbers are being used as the basis of entire arguments and positions, and that any opposing views are roundly criticized without given due consideration. It makes for a poor environment for conversation, as conversations are not only less likely to take place, but those that do take place are likely to center around misleading / unimportant ideas. Contrary to your feeling, I don't believe these numbers are often, or usually ever, challenged. For example, in my reading of these boards in the last 24 hours, an individual gave numbers for a particular WR's season averages. Another individual pointed out, rightly, that those numbers couldn't be remotely true. Whether it be a consequence of the "ignore" feature that has been championed here (also discouraging quality discussion) or a lack of desire to address the issue, there was no other response or acknowledgement from the community (to my recollection and at the time of my reading). There was another post in that time frame in which an individual extrapolated percentages for which QB the Browns were favoring, calling them "weighted" numbers, but providing no basis on which those numbers were formed. No address by the community. I get it - when this happens as routinely as it does, it is often overlooked, rather than addressed, in an effort to keep conversation moving. I try to overlook the particular offender(s). But these faulty numbers and the ideals centered around them definitely aren't challenged, here. I agree with this in isolation / theory, but we're talking about practical application to sports, here. If you could pick out stats that were both purely objective and predictive, you'd be making a lot of money. Statistics and analytics in sports are often severely subjective, and it's important to point them out when they are. Guys like Adam Silver have made tons of money off of their subjective statistics being right once and while, acting as experts, while completely ignoring and sweeping under the rug the times when they were outrageously wrong. We'll take the example of "catchable ball", which has not been used on here infrequently. How are we defining that? Within a certain radius of the player? Must it hit the WR's hands? How do we account for contact from a defender? Location relative to the sideline? This list of questions in definitions goes on, and you can't create one uniform number that is objective and takes into account the necessary variables. So, this is inherently a highly subjective and questionable stat. And yet, it and those like it are often used here as the aforementioned basis to entire arguments, and support for shutting down any opposing arguments. I don't feel that these things exclude me from a conversation Irish. Conversely, I think they can make for better conversation, if they're called out. Unfortunately, I feel that the atmosphere here is what's exclusionary. You and I have discussed items before, and you made a point that I keep in mind - Browns fans, with as much as they've gone through, often don't need those outside their fandom's input, for their own sanity. I can get that. I'm a Browns supporter, but a Bears fan first. So, since then, I've elected to stay out of conversations, out of respect. But, for those that might want to participate here, they're met with an atmosphere that isn't conducive to constructive conversation. I think this is partly due to the time of year. This is the single worst time of year for football. There's nothing to talk about, and the media breeds nothing but the speculation and uselessness that we've been discussing. But, it's also partly due to the way some posters choose to go about their interactions with one another. However Browns fans want to go about it, I'll leave them to it. But Lyman had a valid position, and it was, as is often the case, dismissed with snark and offense. I felt that worth addressing. Edit: Holy shit, that was too much. Sorry about all that. I think it's a much more succinct point, than the wall of text I wrote above. It's no less valid, but certainly not easier to read. My bad.
I think my previous post addressed most of this, such as the example of "catch radius". If you want to take an objective metric, such as hand size, and compare it to performance, that's fine. I totally agree with you that it then becomes about the interpretation, not the metric itself. But, that's not often the nature of the numbers being used here. I have no problem with the latter, and it's what makes for good sports conversation, in many cases (or regurgitated discussion in others, but hey...). I haven't seen a single stat that claims they're the end-all-be-all, no. But, I have seen poster(s) claim that these stats create an end-all-be-all position, based on them. And, when combined with the aforementioned subjective numbers and confirmation bias selections, well... that makes for the scenario we're discussing. I agree with this 1,000%. That's not what often happens here. Born at the start of the 90's, so I guess I fall in there. I think the discussion of generations relating to behavior is fascinating, but it's not something I have a particular knowledge of.
In the end, these discussions, when challenged are broken down into simple debates. When addressing a debate, you use what ever tool you have in your arsenal to make your point, otherwise, you are a waste of breath. Message boards for the most part, when pertaining to sports, are just that, a forum for debating, who will win, what moves should be made, who has a better schedule, roster. In this case what prospect (that no one, not even the experts know will even be able to play a down of football) your favorite team should choose. Debating, in essence, is arguing. Mostly facts are needed to win that argument, but in some cases something as simple as analytics can work as well. Within the numbers used, unless absolutes, these are also debatable which adds to the conversation. I certainly think there is a place in a football conversation about QBs abilities for a debate over catchable balls. I feel it is relevant to the conversation. It doesn't matter what the criteria is, the think tank doing the analysis uses the same criteria for ALL the players, so they are a valid measuring tool. Now, if you are just saying, I watched film and I don't think that was a catchable ball, then that too is debatable. But these sources don't have room for bias. What do they gain using different metrics for each individual? See what I mean? Sports forums are always going to carry a sense of challenge. There aren't many people who agree on everything from a fanbase standpoint, let alone enter in someone from another fanbase. If you don't enjoy the banter of debate, then sports sites probably aren't for you. In most cases, everyone comes back for more, because frankly they want to be entertained and that's what the debates do. I'm not sure about all the references to name calling, but we are certainly over sensitive to any outsiders based on what we have endured for the past 20 years..We can't help it, so if you are coming around, you just need to be forewarned that it will happen on occasion.
