“Born on third base” is usually a meditation on the arbitrariness of advantage, though. College fanboys of Rand usually lack that degree of self awareness.

You do risk Elianating your readers.

It’s a sign alright. A sign of hypocrisy.

Pretty much spot on.

PS: Let me state the argument one more time in a way I hope will make sense. You are absolutely right to question QBR’s assessment in the examples you cite. I believe people should freely disagree with QBR where other objective metrics and (yes) subjective appraisals contradict it.

We’re going in circles now. As before, your argument proves nothing except that the model isn’t perfect, which nobody ever claimed it was. You can cherry pick as many examples as you want. The objective fact remains that QBR does a better job OVERALL of explaining and predicting wins than other statistical measures of…

You realize that criticizing QBR because it doesn’t match your perception of how good these players are is pretty much the definition of subjective? What am I saying... of course you don’t lol.

D-League needs to be a true developmental league. At a minimum, teams should be allowed to pay high draft picks NBA scale but not have it count against the salary cap while they’re in the D-League. Sort of like how MLB handles minor leaguers.

I really don’t think Bargs is comparable though. That guy wasn’t even league average until his sixth season — and that was an outlier for his career.

I agree: this is no mirage. First, he’s been doing it for more than a season now and the improvement has been steady. Second, as you note, there are very good explanations for the change — e.g., the shot doctor — that bode well for the future.

Wow really? That’s surprising... and strangely reassuring.

LOL! I love how you claim I can’t know QBR is objective because the formula is secret, then turn right around and assert that this secret, unknowable formula is completely subjective.

Colin Jost is indeed a dumbass but there’s more than a grain of truth in what he said. There was a cultural element at play here — not just in the blue-collar white voters who flipped to Trump but also in the brothers who stayed home on election day.

+1 Note 7

No it doesn’t. The weighting is all done by Win Probability. The only arguably subjective component is judgment calls about whether certain passes are overthrows, underthrows, etc. That’s no different than when people assign responsibility for tackles, targets, etc. Don’t hate on what you clearly don’t understand.

As I mentioned to the other guy, that just highlights the folly of putting much stock in a small sample’s worth of QBR data. When somebody makes that mistake, you should feel free to call them on it loudly and obnoxiously. Well, maybe not loudly and obnoxiously but do call them on it.

Sure but all that proves is QBR isn’t a very reliable metric over one game or even a handful. It’s been objectively demonstrated that QBR has a very close correlation with wins over a full season — much closer than Passer Rating, ANY/A, etc. That in itself doesn’t prove anything (kneel downs correlate closely with…

You’ll put your eye out!

If you’re going to use a box score stat, use Adjusted Net Yards/Attempt. Historically, ANY/A correlates better with actual NFL wins than passer rating.

Perhaps that’s because QBR doesn’t do that? At least, not in the sense I think you and Barry mean. What QBR does is weight stats when the game is on the line more than those when outcome has been decided. Basically, it rewards “clutch” play. Precisely the opposite of your baseball example.