Whodi - I'm going to try to make this easy. Apparently you don't think I understand English or something. I fully recognize the difference between an event already perceived and a prediction for the future. You seem to miss the point though.

People use statistical data to analyze past events. They then apply that analysis to present conditions to try to change and PREDICT (does using caps help you?) future outcomes. If you can show me another reasonable use for past statistical data, by all means, go ahead.

You seem to want to pigeon hole this debate in such a way by suggesting that I asked you to give me the number of yards, rec, tds, etc. that Joe Horn will have next year. I asked a simple question, where will the guy rank compared to other WR's in the league? I didn't say that you couldn't use a range. I didn't say that you had to be right on or give me his EXACT stats (again, just trying to use your words and capitalization - mayeb that will get the message through).

Your response to my question was in the top 32. To me that's either a cop out, or you think Horn will drop off significantly in production as compared to last season. I asked you which of those you are doing? Copping out or predicting Horn will drop off. Seeing your seemingly insurmountable problem with making predictions, I guess you were copping out.

Hey man, I understand why you're mad. You made a big deal about Horn's contract, which I told you was posturing and would work out fine. Then you said that we couldn't sign players long-term, let alone draft picks, with Howard's cap number - again, not so. Now you're claiming that you don't care about individual player performances so long as the team is winning, when all you do is sit around and argue about individual player performances. I can understand why you're upset.


To answer your questions, so that you don't moan about it, as ridiculous as they are, I offer the following:

1. Find anywhere where I ever said stats are irrelevant.

Please explain this statement Whodi:
Essentially, that reads that individual player performances (e.g. stats) are irrelevant to you so long as the team is winning. That's a statement most people agree with, but I am suggesting that it simply isn't true for you. Even if this team is winning you will still be concerned with stats. If that isn't the case, then, as I said before, I don't expect to hear anything negative from you so long as the team is winning this season.

2. Find anywhere where I predicted an EXACT future ranking for a player

I never suggested that you did. But good job changing the issue.

I would say nice try, but it wasn't. So your first argument WhoDat, was I said stats are irrelevant. Never in 3700 posts have I said that, so you had to move on. Your second argument I have no problems with the team, cause I won't predict an exact ranking. Which again was total BS. So now you have moved on to I am mad cause of an argument from months ago. That's the best you got? Seriously? You can't back up ANYHTING you have said in this thread so you have to attempt to make it seem to be something else? Nice try Whodini, I don't fall for the smoke and mirrors bit. You have NOTHING to back up this foolishness, and even made several posts asking me questions about what if these past stats happened, making the exact point I have been emphasizing for 11 posts now. THEN, to top that off, in a weak attempt to answer my 1 and 2 question, you take a sentence from an entire paragraph and try to work it as proving your point. Priceless. I will do this also using the last post you made.

I am leaning towards or something. See how that works? I took a snippet of what you said, and turned it into something else to prove my point. Essentially what you are saying here, is you are not sure if you understand English or something. Man, that was easy. A lesson from the WhoDat school of debate. When you have nothing, and when your own posts have proven the other person's point, take a snippet and make it fit your argument. SO since I have been making the same point the whole time, I am going to assume you only understand or something, and not English, since that's what you said. That was prize worthy WhoDat. Bravo.

LOL. Oh, so now I'm taking your comments out of context, is that it? Laughable.

Who cares if Joe's stats are best in the league if the team isn't winning?
Screw the "small" stuff? What is the small stuff Whodi? Individual accomplishments - that would make sense seeing as how we were talking about just that.
Other than that (10-6 or better and making the playoffs), it doesn't really matter.

I'm taking those comments out of context am I? OK, if they don't mean that you don't care about stats so long as the team is winning, please describe for me what your intended meaning was with that post.

Damn, now I have to explain English. I was just playing around with that or something, I guess it's real. Okay.

I guess the capitalized WILL, indicating FUTURE TENSE, was missed by you. This is the tone of that whole paragraph. I don't care where their rankings are gonna be or to predict that, it will only matter where their rankings are ONCE A GAME OR THE SEASON IS OVER. RIGHT NOW, it's all about winning. Notice the if we aren't winning part at the end? Means once a game or season is over, stats can be used to assign a particular amount of blame here or there, CAUSE THE GAME OR SEASON IS OVER. No need for guess work. WILL RANK. WILL RANK. WILL RANK. PREDICTING exact stats is irrelevant to me. Once you get this point, all of this BS will become as silly as I see it.

And rightfully so. Gee, why do I feel I have made this argument previously? In English, and rightfully so means you are justified in feeling a certain way. Thus, if Joe posts specific stats, and they are looked at ONCE THE GAME OR SEASON IS OVER(see this is where you have to go back to the beginning and the capitalized WILL to know this is still in future tense), using those ALREADY ACHIEVED stats in a Joe isn't old argument is justified. Cause he will have achieved them. Making it so you didn't have to guess as to what they would be. Giving you a factual leg to stand on in such an argument. Cause they already happened. And are recorded. And you can post them. And not have to guess. Cause they happened. Hopefully repetition will get the point across.

Small stuff, i.e. predicting where a player will rank. Small stuff to most, but not to WhoDat. Seems to be a huge deal that Joe get some vindication from me by predicting him in the top 10 in stats. Why is my opinion of Joe so valued by you? I said he would be in the top 32, out of a couple hundred. That wasn't good enough, and you went on to this nonsense. Then made about 3 different reasons to attempt to justify taking it this far, all of which failed. Good job. Is there more need for me to explain why PREDICTING a ranking for a player is irrelevant to me, as oppsed to arguing A RANKING ALREADY ACHIEVED? WILL RANK, WILL RANK, WILL RANK. Future tense. Predicting. Guessing.

Oh - so you're now claiming that the one word you used in the first sentence permiates the entire statement. OK, sure, why not?

So then this statement:

is only true of future performances? If Joe Horn, at some later date, leads the league in receiving but the team is 8-8 then at that future date Joe's stat's won't matter... but right now they do... or they always matter in the present, is that what you're saying Whodi?

You win WhoDat. I fold my tent. I didn't think you could do it, but you did. You made a post so damn lame it defies a logical response. I laid it all out for you, and still get responded to with more inability to understand. I am perplexed at the lengths you will go to in order to make an irrelevant, faulty point. You win man. I rank that as the lamest post yet. Notice I was able to rank it after you posted it, instead of guessing where it would rank by looking at the previous ones.

Cool. Then by your logic, "You win WhoDat" will permiate any and all future discussions we have. Clearly if one word in one sentence can cast the tone for a paragraph in which you make no further allusions to the timeframe you originally claimed to be talking about, then "You win WhoDat" can be used for all of your other posts. fun.

WhoDat , you seen Saintfan around lately ?????

However you get your jollies man. I apologize if your attention span doesn't let you follow a thought out from beginning to end, in the same praragraph. You know, a paragraph, where a consistent thought is established from beginning to end, whereas if a new thought should need to be introduced, it would require the opening of a new paragraph. But let's look at what we were talking about:

The starter:

Asking me to predict where Joe will rank in a FUTURE season. Interesting. My response:

Beginning of a response. What was the answer:

Oh my, there's that word. I wonder would WhoDat is looking for? Since he capitalized the word PREDICT, should I guess he wants me to PREDICT something, meaning something that hadn't already happened? Why I guess so, cause I folloed the paragraph from beginning to end. Response:
Hmm, interesting, still talking about PREDICTING. Let's move on to WhoDat:

Again, WhoDat is asking for a prediction. I sense a trend. Response:

Lame as prediction. Yup sounds like someone who is interested in playing the game. Next:

Not only did WhoDat show what he was looking for by making EXACT predictions on rankings, you attempted to coax me into doing the same. How hard was that? Allow for being wrong. Cute. My response:

WHOA. Back the train up!!! So you mean after no less then 7 or 8 posts about PREDICTING rankings, I make a thread saying I don't care where a player WILL rank and carry out the theme of the ENTIRE conversation, and you still don't get what I am saying? It wasn't just the word WILL, which should have been obvious enough, IT WAS A WHOLE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE SAME THING. A-D-D much?

boy, i wish i had a nickel for every word wd typed to bait people.
and better yet, i wish i had a penny for each word typed in response.......
smitty