538 Calls Tom Brady the 43rd Clutchest Postseason QB
 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...s-eli-manning/

I found the following interesting:

This article projects that, with a replacement level QB, The Patriots postseason record would have been 12-14 or 13-13 without Tom Brady (they are taking out the Bledsoe game).

It projects that Manning's teams would have been 8-16 without Peyton Manning.

Pretty much has always been my point. Manning has a history of not playing like God in the playoffs, but he has always had a hell of a lot more on his shoulders than Tom Brady. And the whole idea of the "Tom doesn't have enough weapons!!!" is criminally stupid.

Doubling down on the stupid.

Give this up. Everyone knows Peyton sucks in the postseason, particularly when compared to Brady.

damn hoot, you are really taking this places.


props to starting your own web site. why did you pick 538 as the name?

Wow, what a really stupid way to gauge players.

Ha haaa. Just idiotic.

Troy Brown! Deion Branch! All time greats!

fivethirtyeight is owned and operated by ESPN ; it's like Grantland

and also, a hell of a lot more credible than coldhardbostondotcomwriterfootballfacts.com that is paraded around as fact by the three Patriots fans on this website

The point is ...

A replacement level QB would've gone 13-13 or 12-14 based off of more research than anyone on this website has EVER done over the course of Tom's 26 full postseason games.

The same replacement level QB would've only gone 8-16 on Peyton's teams.

Discuss.

What's the percentages of these "replacement QBs" even making the playoffs in the first place?

They aren't referring to offensive talent, they're talking the team as a whole.

Peyton usually has good/great receivers, average/below average oline, Perry his RB's, and meh defenses.

The article isn't suggesting Tom Brady had better skill level offensive players around him.

It's suggesting that he had much better teams around him. Teams. Not just an offense. Teams.

For instance.

In Tom Brady's 9-0 start to his postseason career, the most important part of those teams were the defense. Tom was in charge of just trying to be efficient and not ****ing up. We all know that.

Skews the numbers.

Peyton has always had to be the best player on his team. Always. Tom? Not during the successful part of his postseason career. Those teams were always defensive minded teams with Tom being a very efficient game manager.

JFC you and prison bitch...

prove those replacement player win/loss numbers.

Any method that proposes Matt Cassel could win 12 or 13 playoff games is not a valid method at all.

538=ESPN

ESPN=Create stories out of thin air to drive ratings

Bro.

This isn't about that.

It's only benching Tom and Peyton for the playoff games they played in ... they are 26 1 game samples and 24 1 game samples. That's it.

Because this needed a second thread?

again, prove it


or shut the **** up

So the moron who wrote this article predicts Brady's teams would have lost 6-7 more playoff games without Brady and predicts Manning's teams would have lost 3 more games without Manning, and you are using this article as some sort of validation to your Manning > Brady argument?

Hootie gonna Hootie.

it didnt need a second post, let alone thread

The "Hootie Double-Down"

Always great for a cheap laugh

I don't have to prove anything.

538 (owned by ESPN) has a guy who is paid to research these things and provide mathematical analysis of what he finds.

I linked the article, stop trying to accuse me of pulling things from thin air.

According to his research, Matt Cassel would have gone 12-14 or 13-13 in playoff games started by Tom Brady.

Matt Cassel would have gone 8-16 in games started by Peyton Manning.

Now, if you want to dig deeper, this still doesn't suggest Peyton > Tom in the postseason.

Since Tom is 18-8 (they threw out the Bledsoe game) and Peyton is 11-13.

So Tom has still been 5 games better than replacement to Peyton's 3.

The point it really makes is ...

TOM BRADY HAS ALWAYS HAD BETTER TEAMS SO STOP WITH THE GOD DAMN "TOM HAS NO WEAPONS" TRIPE.

Hootie's still going at it I see

Nope.

Read my last post.

Just said the same thing.

Tom has been 1.2 wins better than his ELO predictions and Peyton has been 2.2 wins worse than his.

This is more or less proof that debunks the idea that Tom Brady doesn't have any weapons.

He's had the weapon of having the best team in football for about 1.5 decades now. Not to mention his head coach...

This is turning into Michael Scott on Football.

so, in an imaginary world....


in the real world, Brady trumps Manning in every category

end of story

This obsession has gone too far, turn off the laptop and step outside for some fresh air and sunshine.

Haha.

I'm going at it by posting an article that states what I've been stating for years with statistical proof.

Tom has been OK in the postseason. Not great. Not clutch. He's been pretty good. According to this article, even a little bit better than Manning.

But neither of them have been great by any standard.

Approaching blackbob levels.

so some guys mathematical analysis says it so it HAS to be right?


seriously?

I don't think he's going to stop anytime soon.

Holy shit, I am going to faint.


Hootie just said Manning hasn't been great. This is progress, people.

so when a replacement level is supposed to go 13-13 on Brady's teams ...

you're surprised that he's won most of those games?

Must be nice to only need a replacement level guy to go 13 - 13.

Sure Manning would have won more games if his replacement level wasn't 8 - 16.

You're looking at the first chart, where the second one, down the page, is where he runs the numbers with a replacement-level QB, which is what the text you quoted is talking about.

In this chart, Brady ranks 6th, behind Eli, Montana, Warner, Flacco, and Elway.

how is some guy's mathematical analysis "PROOF" of anything that would/could happen in a football game?

Nope. Please quote where I said this.

It's an article featured on ESPN.

I found it interesting that Brady, a guy who has never had any weapons, has a team that is projected to be 13-13 in the games he's started in the playoffs with a replacement level QB.

Do you not agree with WAR in baseball? It's pretty much the hottest stat in baseball.

It's called wins above replacement.

Are you saying football can't have WAR?

Oh, ok.

so are you saying hootie read the wrong mathematical analysis "proof"?

I think we all need to line up and take turns slapping him back to reality like in Airplane.

Yeah, I know. The thread title was for trolling purposes only.

So far, it has worked.

It's proof as long as it fits Hootie's agenda apparently

LMAO


you said it was "PROOF", do you neeed me to quote that post again



what does steamer say?

I think the only thing he got wrong is the thread title, it should say 6th, not 43rd.

Can you provide one reason why you shouldn't receive a time out for this? You do remember that you allowed back on a short leash, yes?

No, not at all.

Brady's teams 12.6 - 13.4 with replacement level QB
Manning's teams 8 - 16

and if you don't want to agree with that, fine

but baseball geeks think of WAR as gospel, and none of this was math done by me

It was research done by someone who has more credentials than anyone on this board.

I was never allowed back on a short leash and I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to talk about football on this board.

You suck a lot of dick, and it grosses me out.

I see that Flacco is #3.

Sanchez is #9!

You were graciously allowed back. And I'm pretty sure that it was conditional on you behaving yourself (i.e., a short Hootie leash). I would say that you are pulling on that leash pretty hard.

Maybe you could throttle it back a little? Thanks in advance.

Statistical proof?! Really?!

Maybe instead of waiting tables at Bennigan's and banging chicks with bladder control issues, you should have taken a statistics class.

Pulling it hard?

For posting a football topic on a football board and providing a link to an article and asking others to discuss the topic?

Wow. You're dumb!

you already admitted you were trolling

Yes.

According to the statistics ran by Nate Silver, a very respected member of sports media, Tom Brady's teams with a REPLACEMENT LEVEL QB would have gone 12.6 - 13.4 in his 26 completed postseason starts. Peyton Manning's with that same REPLACEMENT LEVEL QB would have gone 8 - 16.

Thus, the idea that Tom Brady doesn't have enough weapons is criminally stupid.

Thanks for playing.

and you admitted you got sloppy drunk one time and sucked off a Vietnamese American in an alley behind your auto shop ...

but am I holding that against you?

yeah that never could have happened you dip shit.


there isnt even an alley in the whole county i live in...

Yea, SAUTO sucked him off in a field. Get it right.

Yes, pulling it hard.

You admitted that this thread is trolling and you already started a thread on this same reeruned subject matter.

and i guarantee i can hold my liquor infinity times better than your dumb ass.

***OFFICIAL APOLOGY***

I apologize for posting an article I read on ESPN by Nate Silver that calls into question the idea that Tom Brady is the best postseason QB of all time.

I realize posting football articles on ChiefsPlanet is deeply frowned upon by Donger, and I deeply apologize for that.

From now on, I'll stick to asking things like "Cardele Jones or Alex Smith", or "Philly Cheese Steak Sandwich or Alex Smith", or "AIDS or Alex Smith" just to keep things normal around here.

I realize provocative talk about hot topics in football is heavily against the rules and I feel terrible for violating those.

Hahahaha.

Who the **** cares about that in a 'QB driven' league?!?!?!

:rolleyes:

Perhaps the most tired meme in all of football.

SAUTO aint never been a sucker.

thats what i pay you for.

I accept your apology. That's a good boy.

maybe, but I can juggle knives better than you and I can carry three cups in one hand so ...

score another one for the dragon!

It's still not "proof". Just like WAR in baseball isn't "proof". It is a prediction based on a mathematical equation.

i can carry three cups in one hand too, busboy

I agree.

So it's official, then.

Tom Brady has always been on better teams than Peyton Manning so we can no longer pretend that Tom only loses because he doesn't have enough weapons ... since his teams are always expected to win...and even with Matt Cassel, still expected to win half of the time in the most pressure packed games (playoff games) as proven by Nate Silver.

Whereas, without Peyton, his team would only be expected to win 1 out of every 3 times.

Flacco > Brady OR Manning.

LMAO

Never go full Hootie

Sanchez > Brady, Elway, Manning, etc.

Ok, fair.

So the same people, like Prison Bitch (and me), who put a high emphasis on WAR, it's fair to say that this is a pretty revealing article and it kind of dispels a few myths about Tom Brady, correct?

Or are we just going to pretend WAR is no longer a good metric whatsoever because I brought it up and it kind of painted a picture I've been trying to paint for like 10 years now?

According to this metric, he is more CLUTCH than Brady or Manning in the postseason.

This metric has nothing to do with who is the more talented or better QB.

Moron.

Any analysis that suggests Trent Dilfer, Mark Sanchez and Tony Eason are better quarterbacks than Tom Brady is the spastic rambling of a reerun.

See below for a mathematical proof that Hootie is an idiot:

http://www.vector-eps.com/wp-content...as-vector1.jpg

Don't blame me if you don't understand it. The math proves it. Hootie is an idiot.

here you go again saying this article actually PROVES something.


cue the "i never said that" post

Not a big enough sample size, but he does have postseason wins against Brady and Manning in games the Jets were heavy underdogs in so of course it's going to skew the numbers.

But no, Sanchez isn't even on the list.

Tom is 6th; Peyton is 28th; Rodgers is 20th; Luck is 30th

learn to read

(I stated Tom as 43rd as an eye opener on your Sanchez list. Everyone knows that)

You make threads like this to get attention. Everyone knows that.

LET ME JUST REPHRASE THIS, MORONS

THE WAR AT THE QB LEVEL IN POSTSEASON GAMES FOR BRADY AND MANNING:

BRADY 12.6-13.4
MANNING 8-16

DISCUSS.

(Or ignore it)

ROFL

I don't believe you.

ComoDragon

and again no ****s were given.

Who gives a shit about other teams.

How about we stop pretending that the Chiefs would 'rape faces' if the only thing we changed was some magical superstar QB we missed out on [Rodgers being the exception] or upgrading team deficiencies if a waste of team so long as Alex is our QB.

Poor Hootie. So pathetic...... LMAO