You said in two separate posts:
You even posted an explanation for why speed would be negatively correlated:
Why should I care about the SXCH ratings?
Originally Posted by: mi_keys
I'll try one more time. I’ll teach you something here!
The argument: Speed is unequivocally a positive trait for WR. But amongst top 10 WRs as rated by Sports Exchange; the fastest WRs are not as good as the slowest. Hence, speed as a trait is given too much importance when rating WR prospects.
Your argument cant be directly addressed because it is replete with every logic error known to man several times over.
The Sports Exchange is the best predictor of draft position and they use the best measure of 40 time [not necessarily the fastest or electronic]. If you disagree, educate yourself, look at the top 10 WRs, they rarely miss, if they do it’s not by so much and sometimes they’re right when they “missed.”
Why'd I use the sample I did? Because top 10 over 6 years is much better than using top 60 one year or WRs rated 40-50 over 6 years. You want a bigger sample size...the world is your effing oyster.
If you cant see that the faster guys are not as good as slower guys, you just need to educate yourself, develop your own criteria. The football gods helps those that help themselves.
A Barfarn teaching moment: When testing to see if a coin is weighted is flips enough? If you say no, YOU ARE WRONG! I’ll show you later.
Are 20 flips of coin enough to tell if a coin is weighted? The correct answer is: IT DEPENDS ON THE RESULT!!!! If the coin lands on, EG, heads 11 times out of 20; this is evidence that the coin is weighed to heads. It is very weak evidence; and more flips of the coin must be made to strengthen the evidence; yet, to say this is “nothing” is not scholarly. But, one who asserts the coin is weighted to heads because it landed on head 19 or 20 times out of 20; has very strong evidence to support his hypothesis.
Now back to the 2 flips! If one flips the coin twice and it lands on its edge; that is sufficient data to determine that coins is weighted to land on its edge because the actual result deviates so drastically from the expected result.
By demonstrating the top 3 slowEST are better than the top 3 fastEST [this is significant, often .2, sometimes .3, seconds] of the sample size of 60 WRs provided statistically significant results to establish the forego hypotheses that speed is overrated.
I used to ask all the time what is a or the trait Davante possesses that makes him desirable? I'm still not sure what that is. Perhaps, his strength? Barfarn seemed to indicate it was body control which Z has pointed to or the ability to set up the DB to get by him. I don't see all 22 so not sure if that's his calling card or not.
Ultimately, his perception is benefited greatly by literally being the worst WR in the NFL last season.
Originally Posted by: uffda udfa
Think Nerd correctly said Body control. I speak of his strong route running and separation abilities.
He was not the worst receiver last year; he was below average. He is not a pro bowl receiver this year, he simply took the next naturally progressing 3rd year step in reading and reacting to the D. If he keeps progressing he’ll be unstoppable.
You don't need all 22; 90% of his moves are in the screen.