Davante trade- steal of the century

[Madcity_matt]

interesting deep statistical analysis versus the haul we got for Davante.

See below. in 6083 snaps, Davante was only targeted 946 times. Based on previously accepted all inclusive assumptions, he was not targeted 5170 times, which were all as a result of Adams not running the correct route or getting open, as he would thusly have been targeted.

Also refutes the idea that Rodgers didn't have any help last year as 7th round pick Samari Toure was brought in to be a more efficient receiver.

GP snap trg wrong route ran wrong route ran percentage
Davante Adams 2015 GBGB 13 763 94 702 92%
Davante Adams 2016 GBGB 16 985 121 864 88%
Davante Adams 2017 GBGB 14 776 117 659 85%
Davante Adams 2018 GBGB 15 954 169 785 82%
Davante Adams 2019 GBGB 12 761 127 634 83%
Davante Adams 2020 GBGB 14 905 149 756 84%
Davante Adams 2021 GBGB 16 939 169 770 82%
career 100 6083 946 5170 85%

[Pckfn23]

[Acrobat]

[Labrev]

[Crazylegs Starks]

[BF004]

Same applies here, guys.

Let’s not chase this topic all over the forum. I’m all for posting accurate information, but let’s not do it at the expense of other members.

4) Stay on Topic: common sense applies. Thorough discussion of topics, along with the exploration of various tangents related to the main topic, is highly encouraged. However, kidnapping of a topic (i.e. for the sole purpose of redirecting a thread to a personal pet topic) is prohibited. Also, if you’re posting a message pointing out that another poster is not staying on topic, then you are not on topic. Stay on topic.

5) No Stalking: keep your discussion, and your vested emotions, within the topic of discussion. Stalking a member throughout the site to get the last word will not be tolerated.

[Madcity_matt]

Same applies here, guys.

Let’s not chase this topic all over the forum. I’m all for posting accurate information, but let’s not do it at the expense of other members.

4) Stay on Topic: common sense applies. Thorough discussion of topics, along with the exploration of various tangents related to the main topic, is highly encouraged. However, kidnapping of a topic (i.e. for the sole purpose of redirecting a thread to a personal pet topic) is prohibited. Also, if you’re posting a message pointing out that another poster is not staying on topic, then you are not on topic. Stay on topic.

5) No Stalking: keep your discussion, and your vested emotions, within the topic of discussion. Stalking a member throughout the site to get the last word will not be tolerated.

Sorry. Sometimes reducing an argument to the ridiculous is the easiest way to see it. To be fair, I didn't post this under #4 WR thread as I didn't want to further derail that thread.

As a wise man once said, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[go pak go]

Same applies here, guys.

Let’s not chase this topic all over the forum. I’m all for posting accurate information, but let’s not do it at the expense of other members.

Sorry. Sometimes reducing an argument to the ridiculous is the easiest way to see it. To be fair, I didn't post this under #4 WR thread as I didn't want to further derail that thread.

As a wise man once said, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Statistics and data are very useful when used correctly and when used by the right people.

Group A (think business leaders, managers, scientists, etc.) compile data and use a multitude of statistical principals to analyze to find correlation and possible explainable variables. However, this group always questions the validity of the confidence level in their assertions and the reliability of the data as well as the strength of the correlation. This group gets excited when a new perspective on the data is introduced and is hungry to look into and discuss further.

Group B (think politicians or anyone trying to use a stat line to prove a point) already has an inherent bias or variable they are trying to push and finds whatever stat they can use to help push it. They aren't interested in actually being right (because nothing is actually always right). They are interested in winning an argument/vote/or any other transactional point.

[Yoop]

Same applies here, guys.

Let’s not chase this topic all over the forum. I’m all for posting accurate information, but let’s not do it at the expense of other members.

Sorry. Sometimes reducing an argument to the ridiculous is the easiest way to see it. To be fair, I didn't post this under #4 WR thread as I didn't want to further derail that thread.

As a wise man once said, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Statistics and data are very useful when used correctly and when used by the right people.

Group A (think business leaders, managers, scientists, etc.) compile data and use a multitude of statistical principals to analyze to find correlation and possible explainable variables. However, this group always questions the validity of the confidence level in their assertions and the reliability of the data as well as the strength of the correlation. This group gets excited when a new perspective on the data is introduced and is hungry to look into and discuss further.

Group B (think politicians or anyone trying to use a stat line to prove a point) already has an inherent bias or variable they are trying to push and finds whatever stat they can use to help push it. They aren't interested in actually being right (because nothing is actually always right). They are interested in winning an argument/vote/or any other transactional point.

well I guess it may sound to simplified to come up with a conclusion that snap count matters, but when ya look at all the lost time from the main 5 receivers why did Touri only see 112 snaps? target ratio of only 8% to snap count doesn't suggest he was open very often either.

I went and watched his receptions, on only one occasion did he make a contested catch, all 4 others he was poorly covered, for me that explains why he didn't get more game snaps.

true ya can't just look at these stats to form a conclusion, however I did watch the games, and my memory might be getting bad, but not so bad I can't recollect a general idea of what I saw.

[bud fox]

Wasn't toure a 7th round rookie?

What are you people doing ... let's drop the green and gold shades and come back to reality.

Toure more likely to be out of the league in 5 years than starting.

[Pckfn23]

[Yoop]

just what the hell is so funny about that 23? that is the reality of Toure's situation, Matts comparison to Tae Adams is ludicrous to say the least, Toure was the last drafted receiver in his class, Adams was a top 30 prospect in his.

[Pckfn23]

just what the hell is so funny about that 23? that is the reality of Toure's situation, Matts comparison to Tae Adams is ludicrous to say the least, Toure was the last drafted receiver in his class, Adams was a top 30 prospect in his.

[Labrev]

Matts comparison to Tae Adams is ludicrous to say the least,

Correct, Toure is a better receiver than Adams. Look at the Wrong Route Percentage on Adams, 82% on a good season!! Toure as a rookie already is 32% better.

Adams cannot hold Toure's jockstrap, insulting to Toure to even begin to think to compare him to Davante.

[wallyuwl]

[Drj820]

So we are at this phase of the off-season huh

[wallyuwl]

So we are at this phase of the off-season huh

Screenshot_20230517-195515_Facebook.jpg (469.91 KiB) Viewed 413 times

[Madcity_matt]

just what the hell is so funny about that 23? that is the reality of Toure's situation, Matts comparison to Tae Adams is ludicrous to say the least, Toure was the last drafted receiver in his class, Adams was a top 30 prospect in his.

Of course it’s ludicrous.

[Pckfn23]

Of course it’s ludicrous.

It's not surprising who didn't get the satire.

[TheSkeptic]

Some people just don't understand this thread at all.