Gates vs Witten

[SIMstyle]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

I got you, you're taking stats as the be all end all for production and turning them in to ratings. I don't agree with that logic, but to each their own.

Understood. because here's the thing, when it comes to accurately rating players you have to use more real data than subjective stuff. ratings bring out the homer in sooo many people (sometimes theyre unaware of it) and because they're directly affected, people tend to be biased about the players they cheer for on sundays. looking at data is much more accurate and is really the only way to go.

Otherwise you get this "Dez Bryant is a 85 (he's a 74 AT BEST) Vick is a 95 at QB mess."

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by rich7sena

I don't think it's really that comparable or debatable. You brought up Antonio Gate's comments about Witten, well Gates finished 22nd among a player voted NFL top 100 list while Witten finished 36. While the Cowboys are struggling to score in the red zone, Gates is setting records for touchdowns for a tight end. Knock Gate's blocking all you want but Tony Gonzalez never was a great blocker either but both are going to be widely considered better tight ends than Jason Witten when it's all said and done. The tight end position has evolved into much more than a utility player. Given the opportunity, teams would always rather have the more explosive and a point scorer than a guy whose good at a lot a things but not really all time great at anything.

If you polled the players and talent evaluators, etc I don't think it would be a particularly close vote.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by SIMstyle

Understood. because here's the thing, when it comes to accurately rating players you have to use more real data than subjective stuff. ratings bring out the homer in sooo many people (sometimes theyre unaware of it) and because they're directly affected, people tend to be biased about the players they cheer for on sundays. looking at data is much more accurate and is really the only way to go. Otherwise you get this "Dez Bryant is a 85 (he's a 74 AT BEST) Vick is a 95 at QB mess."

I understand the idea behind it, and the homertude gets out of hand. It is subjective, but I have never been a stats tells the whole story guy. Particularly with pass receivers.

[R0M0mentum09]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

I understand the idea behind it, and the homertude gets out of hand. It is subjective, but I have never been a stats tells the whole story guy. Particularly with pass receivers.

So.Cal? San Diego fan. . . . hmmmmmm

[SoxFan01605]

The trouble with the comparisons are that they are different player types AND have different roles in the offense. Gates is hands down more explosive and athletic. Witten, while certainly an excellent route runner and pass catcher, simply doesn't have the burst that Gates has. I would say Witten is a better blocker, but not to the degree that some people seem to think (people act as though Gates is a one-trick pony, which isn't the case).

I think the comparisons between the two are similar (conceptually) to ones between Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith. You can't argue the production of Emmitt and he maximized everything he had, but I don't know too many people who would say he was better than Barry Sanders. I would say the same about Witten relative to Gates.

That said, as a Cowboys fan, I wouldn't trade Witten for anyone, including Gates. I think he brings a needed toughness and credibility to a relatively soft Dallas team. I don't think you can really reflect that in ratings though.

[SIMstyle]

Quote: Originally Posted by shnuskis

Those stats don't tell the whole story. Those are gross numbers and nothing is mentioned that Witten played 6 more games than Gates to get those numbers from last year. Gates had 10 TD's and 700 yds in 10 games. That is better production than Wittens 1000 yds 9 td's in 16 games. You are also not taking into concideration Gates' yds/catch. Gates:11.7, 14.6, 15.6. Witten: 11.8, 11.0, 10.7

you always want to be careful with the injury/Player X coulda/woulda/shoulda had more numbers with more time on the field. i've always found its better to look at the numbers that were produced and nothing more.

there are formulas like that which tell you that player X is the NBA's most productive player if you extend his minutes and extrapolate his bench numbers for 48 minutes. so many times the players get LESS productive with more opportunities...a prime example was Iguodala of the 76ers. before Iverson left, his 48% FG percentage was viewed as great and an indicator of future superstardom. FACT: he's never shot higher than 45% as the #1 option and is now viewed as a talented player but more of a 2nd or third option on a contender. more time doesnt always = better time.

in the end you can't penalize Witten for being on the field when Gates wasn't. Gates YPC avg is really good (elite actually--it looks like a WRs) but that just tells us something we already knew. he doesnt have an equal (well...maybe K. Winslow II) as a downfield receiver at the TE position.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by R0M0mentum09

So.Cal? San Diego fan. . . . hmmmmmm

What up Kettle. You're black..

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by SIMstyle

in the end you can't penalize Witten for being on the field when Gates wasn't. Gates YPC avg is really good (elite actually--it looks like a WRs) but that just tells us something we already knew. he doesnt have an equal (well...maybe K. Winslow II) as a downfield receiver at the TE position.

I agree. Witten in recent years has certainly been more durable. But wouldn't that be reflected in the durability rating? Which does or has in the past had an impact on the OVR rating?

Personally I never pay attention to the OVR's. I look at the individual ratings and then try to match players who fit the roles I am looking for. People get far to hung up in OVR.