(01-09-2024, 12:24 PM)ChrisJagBoy Wrote:

(01-09-2024, 10:52 AM)ChrisJagBoy Wrote: His TD numbers were better during that stretch too. So was he better or worse?

In week 10 when we had a good record, he had 10 tds 7 ints and 6 fumbles.

Stop.

Bump since the nay sayers wanna ignore the stats.

Yes, bump it so you can go back through and re-read and respond to me which you've glossed over multiple times by quoting me and another poster in the same post and only responding to the other post.  Jameis Winston and Blake Bortles are your guys, right?  TD passes are the end all be all when evaluating QB play?  Not using your eyes, not looking at all passer stats together, not looking at statistical differences from the same player on the same team in the same year from one part of the year to another part.  Ignoring completion percentage, ignoring uptick in turnovers, that's the bump you looking for?

Hey, you don't have to agree it was the injury to Trevor.  I'm not saying definitively that it is because I'm not in his body and I don't know. You can say Kirk being out during the same stretch or some other factor contributed.  I don't really care, but this asinine point you're hammering isn't accomplishing what you think it is.  It only shows that you don't know how to interpret stats at best and that you redact inconvenient ones to push an agenda at worst.  Given your history here, I'm pretty sure I know which it is though it's probably both.  There were clear increases in negative metrics after the Bengals game and that is irrefutable.  I don't really care what you assign as the reason for that, but it is more likely than not it was at least partially due to the injury.

---