Ross Jackson’s biggest takeaways from Loomis, Moore and Ireland at the combine
This is a meme level understanding of statistics.
It's not a meme in any fashion. It's an explanation of the basic principles of probabilities that illustrates the flaw in your "Carr has only won 10 games twice in his 10 seasons, so he only has a 20 percent chance of winning ten games this season" argument.
If I have a box of colored marbles in a bag, and if 2 out of the 10 marbles I grab out of the bag are red, I'm gonna assume about 20% of the marbles in the bag are red until I have more data.
And that assumption is a mistake. You're jumping to unsupported conclusions. You're not calculating probabilities.
Not everything has a 50/50 chance of happening lol, that's just straight up not statistics.
I only said that a coin flip has a 50/50 chance. That's an irrefutable fact.
That's not really true, is it though?
It is objectively true that each season's win-loss record is an isolated occurrence. Teams don't carry over their wins or losses into other seasons.
The previous team and their previous performance tends to be a rather large indicator of how a team will preform the next season barring any big changes (which is what you're generally advocating against).
I haven't advocated against big changes. That's a false statement on your part. The Saints made a big change in the coaching staff and that's something that can have a significant impact on a teams win-loss record.
Dynasties and poverty franchises don't happen just because a coin landed on heads 20 times, they happen because of continuity of play and decision making.
The Saints have made significant coaching changes. They have discontinued some signficant things from last year.
But let's rock with that idea. Are we really gonna say having Patrick Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, and Josh Allen have no positive correlation towards a team winning any given season?
That has nothing to do with anything I've been saying. You're throwing pasta at this point. You said the Saints only have a 20% of getting 10 wins, because teams that Carr has played for have only gotten 10 wins twice in 10 seasons.
That has nothing to do with the fact that QB's, like all players, have an impact on a teams win-loss record. The question is not do QB's have an impact. The question is can you use previous seasons the reasonably calaculate how many games a team can win with a given QB. The answer is no, you can't.
Does having Deshaun Watson, Daniel Jones, or AOC as the starting QB not matter towards evaluating how many loses?
It has an impact, but you can't reasonably calculate the probaility of the future based on the past because so many variables change from year to year.
There are a lot of factors, true (which is why cutting him to save 80 mil in future cap space is so appealing), but being intentional obtuse on the QB, the single biggest factor towards success, does not count towards winning or losing.
You keep confusing "has an impact" with "being able to reasonably calculate a statistical probability." I'm not being obtuse.
This was immediately obvious to me to be a job security decision. If he bottoms out with Carr at the helm, that's not really on him, that's on the cap issues, previous regime, etc.
That's your opinion and you have no way of knowing if your opinion aligns with reality.
But the optics of rolling with a 5th round QB and then bottoming out puts him at a significantly higher risk of being a one and done.
That's also your opinion and you have no way of knowing if your opinion aligns with reality.
Would I do the same thing if I was him? Probably. Do I think it's the best thing for the team? No.
Moore is not you and you are not Moore, so just beause you think that way, it doesn't mean Moore does. I take Moore at his word. You do not,
This isn't really true either is it? Carr didn't really play better...
It is objectively true that Carr played better last year than in 2023, whether you accept it or not.
...we upgraded from the worst OC in the NFL (in 2023, mad respect for Sneaky Pete) to an above average one, elevating the entire offense initially.
Exactly. Carr played better under Kubiak. That's my whole point. There's no way to know or assign a proability to how many games the Saints will win with Moore as the head coach and Carr as the QB, because it's never happened before. There are also other things that have changed that will impact how many games the Saints will win. There's also more changes coming with free agency and the draft that will impact how many games the Saints win.
Kubiak spamming the run so that Carr could make deep ball shots was him maximizing the strength of the QB he had, not Carr getting better.
That' just such a bizarre, denial fueled take. Carr played better, regardless of why he played better.
Even then, he still gave us the ole 5-5 .500 Carr special at the end of it all.
Your bias is showing. You defend Rattler for the team going 0-7 by saying it's not all on him as a QB, but you put all of the responsibility for the Saints going 5-5 with Carr on Carr even though Carr was dealing with the same team issues that Rattler was.
That's double standards. Double standards are a result of biased driven irrationality.
My thoughts exactly. We should stop doing what we've been doing for the past 5 years,...
The Saints aren't doing everything this year that they did last year. They have a new coaching staff and coaching staffs have more of an impact on a teams win-losses than a QB does. You not acceptiong that does not change that fact.
cut bait to our salary cap issues, and build up the team surrounding our young QB.
And your bias shows again. Get rid of the QB that went 5-5 to build the team around a QB that went 0-7, when they both were dealing with the same team issues.