It don’t matter people!
The Road Warriors will prevail.
Denver, Pittsburg, Seattle…It don’t matter.
Why debate who finishes second?
No one remembers who finishes second.
Haven’t had time to think about the games much this week, other than my initial gut feeling from last weekend (in favor of both road teams). I should note, though, re: Omni’s points: I agree with him that Denver probably has to be given the edge in the running game in general, but disagree pretty strongly about the D-line. The Broncos gave up the second-fewest rushing yards of all teams in the regular season, while ranking 29th in passing yards given up. This doesn’t tell the whole story, of course, for a number of reasons:
-
As a result of its efficient offense (both scoring-wise and ball control), Denver was often in situations where its opponents were forced into the passing game. Very often. In yards per rush allowed, Denver is actually squarely in the middle of the pack, tied for 15th - they just had the fewest rushing attempts against of any team in the league.
-
Denver tied for 28th in the NFL in sacks in the regular season, and recorded zero last week. They did manage to get some pressure on Brady, but that was almost entirely due to the use of blitzes; John Lynch and Brady were fast friends by the time the game was over. The fact that they were blitzing this entire time was a primary contributor to the fact that Brady threw for almost 350 yards on a night when his accuracy was off. The key interception was the result of a great individual play by Bailey on a terrible throw, but that throw did not appear to be significantly influenced by pressure on the QB.
-
These two things, opponent play selection by necessity (during garbage time, likely against “soft” defenses) and inability to pressure the QB without help, make the passing defense look worse than it is and make the D-line look MUCH better than it is. There’s a reason the Browns traded all of these guys away; they are certainly playing better in the system Shanahan has them in, but I think that’s largely because they are being asked to do a lot less.
I think the game is decided on whether or not Denver can get an early lead and if they can use their running game. They were mostly stopped last week, but the Patriots were one of the best run defenses after Seymour returned from injury. Still, the fact that the Steelers play a similar style doesn’t make me too optimistic about the Broncos rushing hopes. I guess I think that Denver has the better rushing offense, but Pitt has a much better rushing defense, so will probably have more luck with the running game as a whole. Plummer will have to be the equalizer: there have been times this year it’s looked liked he has been coasting along, being carried by his team, and just not screwing up; and there have been a few games where he has throw some beautiful deep balls and changed the balance of the game. He has to be the latter for Denver to win. “Ward and a bunch of bums” are pretty much a wash with “Smith and a bunch of bums”, and most of the other stuff Omni describes as even, well, I agree. We have seen more from Roethlisberger recently than we have from Plummer, but we haven’t had to see it from Plummer lately.
I think in the end, I just think Pitt was a lot more responsible for Indy collapsing than Denver was for New England collapsing, so the Steelers are still my pick.
Time to finish up the other side of the bracket.
Sunday, January 22nd
NFC Conference Championship
SEATTLE 4 Carolina 43½
I haven’t watched much of Seattle and I’ve seen too much of Carolina. Like The Sports Guy the Panthers are my nemesis, not just because they beat the Bears but because I can’t pick them correctly to save my ass. Clearly whatever the outcome of this column is, you folks should assume the opposite will happen.
QB – I think Hasselbeck is getting the short end from the media this week. Most of the Experts have been ranking the remaining QBs and comparing them and just about every single one has rated Hasselbeck as the least of the 4. The guy led the top rated passing attack in the NFC and is starting the Pro Bowl. He’s accurate and mobile and hasn’t made many mistakes all year. He came out flat in the first half of the game last week, but playoff bye weeks can do that. From what I’ve seen he makes excellent decisions and is especially good in the red zone. Delhomme has been spectacular in the post season and knows how to get the ball to the big guy. A couple of things about him worry me, he gets so excited and frantic at times. So far he’s always channeled that energy into making big plays but it worries me. Secondly, if someone figures out a way to slow down Smith can he be as successful finding his other targets? Nonetheless, Jake’s been awesome and until he loses a playoff game you’ve got to like his chances. I’m calling this match-up a push partly because Hasselbeck has more help around him.
RB – This one’s not really even close. I’m not going to hate on Nick Goings because he’s a pretty good back and last season he put up excellent numbers when forced into the starting role. I expect him to play well again this week, but the lack of depth will be a factor. The Seahawks are dominant on the ground and unless Alexander is much more hurt than reports indicate. The Seattle OL is the best in the league and have been tearing gaping holes in defenses. There’s little doubt that the Panther front will have something to say about it, but the net effect still favors the league MVP at home on that friendly turf.
WR – This category is all about Steve Smith. Neither team has anyone else who can change a game. The Seahawks do have some talented guys and Jackson and Jurevicious both will be a big factor, but neither one is the player that Smith is. The Panthers are hopeless beyond Smith though. The question is whether you’d rather have one great WR or a few good ones. Since both teams have superb secondaries I think that it’s going to take a superior effort by a guy to come up huge and there’s little question which player is capable of that effort. This category goes to Carolina, but if that turf gives Steve problems with his footing or Ray Rhodes studies that Bears tape and finds a way to neutralize him things will tilt the other way in a hurry.
Defense – These two squads are both good, each is especially strong in the secondary. Seattle is very young and the Panthers have experience. The Panther front 4 have a really tough match-up against the Seattle line but they still are a bit more formidable than the Seahawks. Tatupu had a breakout year and is impressive but that’s not enough to make me prefer his group over the Panthers, Morgan is one of the top LBs playing. It’s not overwhelming and I think Ray Rhodes crew will hold their own but you have to like Carolina’s chances. Considering Seattle has the more balanced and explosive offense and a dominant line they’ll need to exert themselves on the defensive side of the ball. Considering how well the Panthers played last week it’s worth noting that they didn’t really stop Grossman and didn’t get much pressure on him. I suppose the question is how much you think of him, if he’s another crappy Bears QB then you need to view the Panther D as suspect for allowing that lowly Bears offense 3 long TD drives.
Coaches – I like Holmgren. Over the last several years he’s taken a lot of heat for his performance in Seattle. Supposedly being the genius but unable to win big games without Favre. Well, there’s another side to that coin, Favre hasn’t won shit without Holmgren either. I think he’s been unfairly criticized. On the otherhand, Fox is a stud. Reportedly a master motivator and I can’t ever recall him bringing a team into a game unprepared. The gameplan he set up against the Giants is probably pretty similar to what he’ll want to do against the Seattle offense and if he’s half as successful he’ll get a win. The match-up is interesting, supposedly pitting the cerebral offensive guy against the intense defensive one. I’ll give Fox the edge, slightly, on recent playoff experience.
Intangibles – Like the AFC game this one features a legitimate home field advantage. The Seahawks are undefeated there and the crowd is as intense as anywhere. That turf supposedly can cause trouble for defenses not used to it and Alexander’s numbers at home are much higher than on the road. The long cross country flight’s never been a positive either. The Panthers probably have all the momentum here, coming off a pair of huge road wins and playing with that underdog chip on their shoulders again. Seattle however has to have a little uncertainty in the back of their head. They played a game last week against the weakest of the final eight teams in a game where their key guy was out. To a degree they still might not have shaken off the rust. Talentwise both squads are pretty equal but everyone knows that Steve Smith can single-handedly change a game and he’ll have the Seattle defense sleepless. You’ve got to give the edge to the Panthers here.
All in all the comparisons favor the Panthers slightly. They take most of the categories but I think the running backs are going to be the most important one and the difference is a large one. At QB, Coach, and Intangibles the difference is very slight. In essence I’m distilling the question down to this: Is Steve Smith going to have another monster day? If he does it’ll be enough to take the Seattle rush out of the game and the Panthers win. If Seattle learns from the Bears mistakes and manage to contain him then I expect the Panther offense to struggle allowing the Seattle offensive line to control the game. As I’ve argued already I think Smith’s huge game was a result of bad coaching more so than anything he did. I don’t expect the Seahawks to be so foolish and they’ll dig up that Cowboys tape and find a way to get two bodies on him at all times.
The Pick: Seahawks
You’re certainly right about that. And based on impressions I can certainly see that the Steelers have looked impressive. By no means do I think Denver is clearly better or hotter right now.
I agree that both teams play with the same concept but I don’t agree that the Broncos are a lesser version of it. I don’t need to explain about the Denver tradition of running the ball. All season they haven’t been stopped. The Steelers have been shut down in a couple of games. Pretty much everywhere else I can easily see how one could reasonably go either way.
Those guys are excellent lineman, no doubt. I however favor the overall rushing statistics as a measure of the quality of a offensive line. Denver has given up 9 fewer sacks this season as well. You seem to be implying that I said Haynes would be dominating this game, I’m not sure where my knowledge of him was lacking in that post. All I said was that the combo of Parker and Haynes will be a bigger factor and never implied a equal distribution. Sounds like you’re being snarky for the sake of it.
No chastizing there, just a bit of disagreement. He did after all admit to having a bias, and god knows I’m heavily prone to it unapologetically. Statistically Plummer is better than Big Ben in every category except completion percentage. I don’t neccesarily think stats tell the whole story but it’s a long ways from a biased viewpoint. And if you’ll actually read my post you’ll see that I said the matchup was a push. :rolleyes:
Thinking like how? Rooting for whom? Who’s post were you reading? 
C’mon, you’re usually much more astute than this. What do you think the statistical categories are?
Yards per attempt: Ben 8.9, Plummer 7.4
Completions per attempt: Ben 62.7%, Plummer 60.7%
Passes per touchdown: Ben 15.8, Plummer 25.3
Passes per interception: Plummer: 65.1, Ben 29.8
I inverted the last two in order to make them more accessible; please don’t make me expound on the passer rating formula. Said formula was devised for the sole purpose of statistically comparing passers. The result?
Ben: 98.55
Plummer: 90.22
Ben is statistically better in every category except interceptions per attempt, including “overall”, which is the passer rating.
While my heart is rooting for a Steelers-Panthers Superbowl because I hate the Seahawks and would like to see my BIL have a perfect football season, I can’t help but root for it to be a Broncos-Panthers Superbowl for exactly one reason, which is the over-under on the number of headlines that will read:
The Two Jakes
hehheh
Looking back over my post, I remain convinced that Roethlisberger is statistically superior to Plummer, and also I remain convinced that he’s just flat out better than Jake the Snake, but DAMN, one pick every SIXTY FIVE passes?!
Shannahan must be zapping him in the nuts with a cattle prod after every pick.
Ellis Dee, I think you’re cherry-picking a bit here.
Look at the regular season comparisons across the board:
NAME COM ATT PCT YDS YPA LNG TD TD% INT INT% SK SYD RAT
3 B. Roethlisberger QB, PIT 168 268 62.7 2385 8.90 85 17 6.3 9 3.4 23.0 129 98.6
7 J. Plummer QB, DEN 277 456 60.7 3366 7.38 72 18 3.9 7 1.5 22.0 135 90.2
Rate stats are certainly important but it’d disingenuous to pretend they are all that matters. Though they are all that matters to QB Rating…which there’s been plenty of discussion on it’s usefulness.
Plummer was WAY out front on total yards which to me more than makes up for the discrepancy in YPA. He had more TDs and fewer INTs. Those are the headlining stats when you compare the two and the ones I refered to. I realize comparing the two teams is apple to oranges and that all these stats are very situational, but the point of my post was to illustrate that I wasn’t showing bias by putting Plummer on par with Big Ben. Depending on what you consider key stats. It may have been a bit overstated to say Plummer wins most of the categories, but he does win some important ones which makes equating the two a reasonable choice.
Big Ben doesn’t suck, and Plummer isn’t way better, but I think these two guys are a good example of what’s wrong with the Passer Rating. A guy who throws for over a 1000 more yards at a much lower INT rate shouldn’t have a drastically lower Rating than another guy. Doesn’t make sense to me. As with all stats they are imperfect and only tell half the story.
Incidentally, why do you hate the Seahawks? They have historically been one of the most non-descript franchises and have basically no interesting history and few remarkable players to become emotional about. They can’t be a rival to any of your teams and there’s not been any high profile player or coach overlap.
Did you get mugged in Seattle once? Think rain is of the devil? Get generally creeped out by overweight coaches with pushbroom 'staches?
No, they are truly all that matters. Even if you compare situational stats, (inside the two minute warning, on third downs, or whatever), the only meaningful metric is to compare on a per-pass basis.
Otherwise, a passer who converted 10 third downs on 50 attempts would have to be considered better than one who converted a perfect 9 third downs on 9 attempts. Are you willing to make that case?
The big issues with the passer rating are as follows:
-
It caps the constituent components. I consider this objection silly, but more importantly it doesn’t apply to this discussion because neither of them have capped values to worry about.
-
Completion percentage is over-valued, because yards per attempt factors it in already, and probably sufficiently. To then add in another metric that is pure completion percentage so vastly over-inflates its importance as to be completely out of touch with reality.
That’s pretty much it. While I agree with the objection #2, I can’t see how it applies all that much in this case, with only an absolute 2% differential between the two passers in question.
I’m a bit surprised by your position, and actually a bit sleepy, but I’d swear up and down that you don’t have a leg to stand on.
First off, Ben missed three games. How does that factor into your total yards and TDs position? How about the fact that Plummer threw way more passes per game started than Ben did?
No, the only meaningful comparisons that can ever be made must be made on a per-attempt basis. How would any other basis of comparison work? He who has the most yards and touchdowns wins? That would make Vinny Testaverde a top ten quarterback of all time.
You’re right in the interceptions category, where Plummer is significantly better. But look at the numbers a bit more closely, and you’ll see that while Jake threw less than half the rate of picks, Ben was in the vicinity of throwing twice the rate of touchdowns. Given just these two metrics, I’d give a slight nod to Plummer. (A touchdown is always points, whereas not all interceptions cost you points.) Toss in Ben’s better completion percentage and better yardage per attempt, and Ben is the clear winner.
Fix the passer rating by pulling out the completion percentage, and Ben’s yardage probably makes up for the difference all by itself. The difference may not look very big at first glance, but Ben threw for 20% more yardage per attempt, which is nothing to sneeze at. Screw “probably”, we can actually address both the major concerns and recalculate. Here is a handy passer rating calculator that will allow us to manually remove both the caps and the completion percentage component. (Ignore the completion percentage line and divide by 4.5 instead of 6.) Plugging in the numbers, the enhanced passer ratings are:
Roethlisberger: 95.09
Plummer: 86.1
Interesting how the removal of completion percentage actually widens the gap between them, eh?
I suppose one could fine tune the numbers and pull out “meaningless” attempts, like say a hail mary in the last seconds of garbage time that results in an interception. I’d have no objection with that, but whatever you’re left with must still be compared on a per-attempt basis.
Perhaps you’re into per-game stats. Plummer threw for 27 more yards per game, but had 8 more attempts to do it. 27 yards on 8 attempts is far below the efficiency of either of these guys’ overall performance. As for touchdowns, Ben threw 1.3 per game compared to 1.1 for Plummer, so even despite having fewer attempts, Ben threw more touches. Obviously, Plummer is still much better on interceptions no matter how you slice it.
To break it down into per-game efficiency, Plummer threw 38.25% more passes per game, which resulted in only 14.67% more yards per game, 13.97% fewer touchdowns per game, and 36.8% fewer interceptions per game.
Soooo sleeeepy…
You’re killing me, as I must go to sleep NOW. But, there’s a laundry list:
- “Holmgren is a GENIUS!!!” Spare me.
- “We’ll take the ball and the win.” Dumbass.
- “WAAAAH! I missed it by 1 yard. WAAAAH!” hehheh
- See me. Feely. FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
Heh, 1 thru 3 can apply to every team in the league at some point. Clearly #4 is all that matters. You must REALLY hate the Ravens.
You’re not going to ever convince me that rate stats are the only thing that matter. They aren’t irrelevant, but by no means is a greater rate necessarily better.
The simplest example is that a QB driving his team down the field on a 10 play, 80 yard drive while making 7 passes for 60 yards and throwing for a touchdown is equally productive as a QB driving the same distance and throwing 4 passes for 60 yards and a TD.
I can’t really distill it down any more than that. If the coaches system favors the west coast scheme it will necessarily lead to more attempts for fewer yards per attempt. There’s no evidence that 30 passes for 300 yards a game is less productive than 20 passes for 250 yards.
In fairness you make a good point about Big Ben missing games, I’d forgotten the injury when looking at the numbers.
I don’t want to sidetrack the thread too much with a debate over QB rating but one comment. The QB rating is an efficiency rating. Therefore it is by definition rate dependant. However efficiency does not necessarily equate to a QBs success.
-
The Broncos, thinking like you that they are going to win.
-
Rooting for the Steelers to beat the Colts so that they wouldn’t have to play them. Guess what? They got their wish. They have to play the Steelers instead.
-
The post of a football neophyte. Cute analysis. You’ll learn more as you watch more football over the years.
I REALLY do. Fucking criminals and thugs, the lot of 'em.
But while you say that 1 thru 3 can apply to any team at any point, 2 and 3 seem to still be unique to Seattle. I don’t ever recall any other dumbass QB calling for the “ball and the win” during a playoff overtime coin toss. It was perfect karma that he threw an overtime pick to lose the game.
Also, Shaun Alexander publicly whined about missing the rushing title by a yard. You say it could happen to anyone, so fair enough, but has anyone else ever publicly whined about missing the rushing title? That’s such a “me first” thing to do.
I also don’t like the fact that their division is a joke, so they get to feast on the 49ers and Cards and basicaly sit out the latter part of the season, unthreatened in their division title.
Now, if the Cards, 49ers and Rams could pull it together and Seattle still won, I’d have a lot more respect for the Seahawks, much like the big three in the South.
But until then, they’re whiny crybabies (the NFL said they weren’t caaaaaaaaaatches; waahhh!!!) who own a shitty division. That’s the team to get to the Superbowl? Hell no, fuck them Seahawks, Go Panthers!
Those are mutually exclusive. If rate stats aren’t the benchmark, then the missed games don’t matter.
It’s not about success, it’s about performance.
How do you judge running backs? Most people find the most impressive stat in all of football to be Jim Brown’s 5.0 yards per carry. Since rate stats are of lesser importance, I’m guessing you find Emmitt Smith’s total yards (lame compiler who cheapened Sweetness) to be more impressive?
If not, how can you reconcile that with your position above?
Don’t get me wrong, I can’t stand the west coast offense, and would love any rationale that sticks it to that awful system, but damn if I don’t think that abandoning rate stats is a horribly misguided way to do it.
It’s much easier to simply point out that the only true success enjoyed by a west coast offense was had by a team that vastly outspent the rest of the league in a time before salary caps and league parity. With even footing, the west coast system is closer to a joke than a success story. (McChoke puking in the Superbowl is the best it’s done in the salary cap era. Certainly the Raiders got humiliated by the Bucs, and the Jets never made it to the conference championship, much less the Superbowl. Plus the Colts, which languished for six years under Peyton’s attempt to run the WCO without winning a single playoff game. And the WC system singlehandedly transformed Michael Vick from a superstar to a bad joke.)
You pull out the completion percentage from the passer rating and I guarantee you will correct all the west coast stat padders. No way will The Chad have led the league in passer rating in 2002, etc…
Not using rate stats is akin to not finding the least common denominator. 1/4 is not greater than 1/2, despite having a bigger integer to bring to the table. At very least, would you admit that you were incorrect when you said that “Plummer was statistically better in every way but completion percentage”?
Consider that if you discount rate stats, Orton threw for seven times the yardage and nine times the touchdowns as Grossman. Or is it okay to normalize when the disparity is 15 games to 2, but not when it’s 16 games to 13?
Yes there is. Either the 300 yard guy threw more incompletions, or the 250 yard guy threw longer completions. Either way it points to the 250 yard guy as being more productive.
Yeah, taken literally they do but I think every team has it’s fair share of foot-in-mouth moments. (Search: “Vanderjagt”, “idoit kicker” or “TO”, “Favre” or “KeyShawn”, “Chrebet”) Personally hubris is one which I find the least loathesome.
Someone in Seattle might have a similar rant about Strahan’s gimme sack. Frankly, I’d imagine you’d have a higher level of hatred for the 49ers being a Giants fan and all. Also the Bears, Pats and Colts didn’t exactly have hotly contested divisions either. I’ve enjoyed the rant though, I love hearing what gets people’s dander up.
Honestly, sometimes I think the intangibles matter more than anything else. More than ratings. More than QB versus QB or Special Team versus Special Team. After all, if everything were stats, we wouldn’t need to play the games. Sporting events are a lot like the stock market: past performance is no guarantee of future success or failure. The Panthers/Bears November/January games are sufficient examples. QBs have lousy days, even famous good ones. Ordinary RBs have explosive games once in a while, even unknown backup ones. A bird can shit in the receiver’s eye at just the right time on a critical play. A gust of wind can make or break a field goal. The predictions are interesting, but I wonder whether a magic eight-ball wouldn’t do just as well.
I don’t see the connection. Certainly Ben’s missed games bolster his yardage and TD numbers. I should have addressed that when comparing the two. What your saying there is contrradictory. When rate stats are the benchmark games don’t matter.
My discussion of total yards versus rate stats is most relevant to QBs They are a special case and comparing the rationale to RBs, defenses or team stats is a different debate. Additionally everything we’re discussing is in the context of a per game basis. Looking at multiple seasons or careers is a straw man. Yards per carry are more important than total yards per game, but total yards per game are definately a important measure.
Is a guy with a 125 yards per game and 5.0 YPC better than a guy with 125 yards and 4.0 YPC…absolutely. Is a guy with 125 yards and 4.0 YPC better than a guy with 5.0 YPC and 75 yards, I think so.
Really I think you’re misrepresnting my argument. No where am I trying to dismiss rate stats for QBs or any other position. They matter and in many cases they are the most important stat. What I am saying is that you cannot totally disregard total yards per game. Even if it takes more attempts, those extra yards will very likely equate to more FGs and improved field position and contribute to winning games. A guy with greater rate stats is more explosive. There’s no debating that, but more explosive is not always the definitive factor. When discussing and comparing players you must look at all the numbers, not just rate stats.
One example that emphasizes my point.
Jerry Rice: Yards Per Catch: 14.8 Yards Per Game: 75.5
Steve Largent: Yards Per Catch: 16.0 Yards Per Game: 65.5
By your rationale Steve Largent is the better WR. My point is that yards per attempt (rushing, passing or receiving) are certainly important but they are not inherently more important than yards per game, and the are absolutely not the only thing that matters.
In fairness, the Bucs also ran a West Coast Offense that season. Favre and the Packers made it work too. I don’t love the West Coast offense either, but it’s not quite the bane of the NFL. It’s at least had more success than the Run and Shoot.
It’s not akin to that at all. It’s actually akin to saying 1/4+1/4+1/4+1/4+1/4 is greater than 1/2 + 1/2. Not that that’s what I’m saying either. Rates per attempt matter, rates per game matter. Both matter, as to what weight they have is for the analyst to judge based on circumstances.
Yup, I admit that. I backed off from it in the earlier post. Seen in the light of the fact that Ben missed 3 games it’s even more apparent. However, that’s not to say that Plummers lead in Yards, TDs and INTs are wholly moot.
Again, I will stress that yards per game are the numbers I’m stressing. I confess to poorly framing the initial comparison because I forgot Big Ben was out for three games. Still, Plummer has a sizable advantage in yards per game. Lets look at a pair of QB stats here:
Kyle Orton: Yards Per Attempt: 5.1 Yards Per Game: 124.6
Rex Grossman: Yards Per Attempt: 6.6 Yards Per Game 129.5
Grossman is a little better based on both categories. (skewed because of the small sample size and that they split time in one game)
Ben Roethlisberger: Yards Per Attempt: 8.9 Yards Per Game: 183.5
Jake Plummer: Yards Per Attempt: 7.4 Yards Per Game: 210.4
To me, those extra 30 yards a game are pretty important. Even though Big Ben is more explosive, Plummer moved his team more each game and that generates points. It’s by no means a direct connection and there’s a thousand other factors here, but Plummer’s offense scored 27.4 points per game, Ben’s scored 25.2 in his games. You simply cannot dismiss total yards per game as being irrelevant.
So he threw more incompletions, big deal. The 300 yard guy covered more yardage which impacts scoring. There’s simply no way to state that longer completions equate to higher scores and more victories. All you can say is that the guy with longer completions was more efficient, and that’s only one facet of quaterbacking.
Just keeping this up.
Sunday is coming.
Crying towels will be available in the lobby.
I’ll agree that quarterbacks are a special case, so that we can just ignore the tangents regarding Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, et al.
Great cites; I knew they were both WCO Superbowl winners, but I think I blocked that from my memory.
27 yards in 8 attempts is nothing to be proud of; in fact, it’s downright awful. That’s the margin of difference between Plummer and Roethlisberger regarding yards. (Jake has him on picks hands down.)
You’ve clarified two important points, that you’re interested in per-game rates and that yards translate into points, so the guy who throws for more yards generates more points. But then, I remember specifically addressing that:
To break it down into per-game efficiency, Plummer threw 38.25% more passes per game, which resulted in only 14.67% more yards per game, 13.97% fewer touchdowns per game, and 36.8% fewer interceptions per game.
Throwing far more passes resulting in a little bit more yardage and actually fewer touchdowns is better? You have a point with the interceptions, but you’re defending your assessment based on yardage and touchdowns, which are two points that don’t seem to support you.
Also, for a guy who is putting a lot of importance on 27 extra yards, it’s a bit cavalier to round that up to 30, isn’t it?