The thing about data is, it is often presented without context. Take away the pieces arranged FOR TB12 and Baker doesn’t help you much, yet the reason he helped - those pieces ARE still here… except without Ballerz - the pieces would not have mattered much. Baker Mayfield was the one ingredient that was both available, and acquired - and his abilities & mental toughness maximized the pieces that contributed to winning more games than the odds-makers (aka: statistician/data analysts) anticipated.
Biggest, I remember your excellent penchant for data, just thought I’d add a little context (wink).
Stats are like looking at a painting from different places in the room, your perception of the art can change when you see the light on the painting from different sides of the room….
The 2005 team won more games than the 2023 team. The 2005 team lost less games than the 2023 team. Both teams won the division. Neither team won the Superbowl. Which team was more successful?
the team that won a playoff game
Unsurprisingly, you're voting for the team that won less football games and lost more football games as being more successful.
But it’s close, and likely has a lot of recency bias attached to it.
I think that may be the case for others as well.
Maybe. It gets back to the context issue you avoid/discount. Which is more akin to how the odds-makers discounted the Bucs coming into this season.
For instance, from the data, you might assume the “success” of 2005 didn’t translate to 2006. But you’d miss the injury bug biting hard that year.
I no longer feel the emotions, the undercurrents, leading up to, and during the 2005 season.
It’s why you can’t compare seasons nearly 20 years apart…all context is lost.
This season stands apart because it was unexpected. Many of us hoped it would be successful, but most of us likely believed those experts that said that based on losing the GOAT, and the roster, this team would only win 6 games.
if Kyle Trask had been the QB, the odds-makers/stats guys may have been right. After all, who else were they considering?
The gritty, “never-count-me-out” attitude by Baker, became infectious. You heard the linemen and receivers, heck, even the defense saw & talked about it.
Now, expectations are higher for 2024, but I bet those odds-makers will be looking back on ‘23 - and I bet our odds for winning will improve… what do you bet?
its the story the data tells that creates interest. The 2005 team lost a playoff game, the 2023 team won a decisive victory against the team that one year previous, was dominant…and Ballerz hammered them.
This is all true, but leaves off the playoff loss in the next game. You skillfully evaded the question, and I'm genuinely curious to know your answer:
The 2005 team won more games than the 2023 team. The 2005 team lost less games than the 2023 team. Both teams won the division. Neither team won the Superbowl. Which team was more successful?
Succesful vs entertaining is more "appropriate" way to characterize/personalize that concept for me. I don't remember 2005 in the slightest, so THIS YEAR was more of Both for me. Win win. Perspective sometimes.
The thing about data is, it is often presented without context. Take away the pieces arranged FOR TB12 and Baker doesn’t help you much, yet the reason he helped - those pieces ARE still here… except without Ballerz - the pieces would not have mattered much. Baker Mayfield was the one ingredient that was both available, and acquired - and his abilities & mental toughness maximized the pieces that contributed to winning more games than the odds-makers (aka: statistician/data analysts) anticipated.
Biggest, I remember your excellent penchant for data, just thought I’d add a little context (wink).
Stats are like looking at a painting from different places in the room, your perception of the art can change when you see the light on the painting from different sides of the room….
The 2005 team won more games than the 2023 team. The 2005 team lost less games than the 2023 team. Both teams won the division. Neither team won the Superbowl. Which team was more successful?
the team that won a playoff game
Unsurprisingly, you're voting for the team that won less football games and lost more football games as being more successful.
But it’s close, and likely has a lot of recency bias attached to it.
I think that may be the case for others as well.
Maybe. It gets back to the context issue you avoid/discount. Which is more akin to how the odds-makers discounted the Bucs coming into this season.
For instance, from the data, you might assume the “success” of 2005 didn’t translate to 2006. But you’d miss the injury bug biting hard that year.
I no longer feel the emotions, the undercurrents, leading up to, and during the 2005 season.
It’s why you can’t compare seasons nearly 20 years apart…all context is lost.
This season stands apart because it was unexpected. Many of us hoped it would be successful, but most of us likely believed those experts that said that based on losing the GOAT, and the roster, this team would only win 6 games.
if Kyle Trask had been the QB, the odds-makers/stats guys may have been right. After all, who else were they considering?
The gritty, “never-count-me-out” attitude by Baker, became infectious. You heard the linemen and receivers, heck, even the defense saw & talked about it.
Now, expectations are higher for 2024, but I bet those odds-makers will be looking back on ‘23 - and I bet our odds for winning will improve… what do you bet?
The term marginalize seems a better vernacular/contextual fit. I guess its a thesarus day. I hate those.
Maybe. It gets back to the context issue you avoid/discount. Which is more akin to how the odds-makers discounted the Bucs coming into this season.
For instance, from the data, you might assume the “success” of 2005 didn’t translate to 2006. But you’d miss the injury bug biting hard that year.
I no longer feel the emotions, the undercurrents, leading up to, and during the 2005 season.
It’s why you can’t compare seasons nearly 20 years apart…all context is lost.
This season stands apart because it was unexpected. Many of us hoped it would be successful, but most of us likely believed those experts that said that based on losing the GOAT, and the roster, this team would only win 6 games.
if Kyle Trask had been the QB, the odds-makers/stats guys may have been right. After all, who else were they considering?
The gritty, “never-count-me-out” attitude by Baker, became infectious. You heard the linemen and receivers, heck, even the defense saw & talked about it.
Now, expectations are higher for 2024, but I bet those odds-makers will be looking back on ‘23 - and I bet our odds for winning will improve… what do you bet?
You seem to be talking about preseason expectations vs. end-of-year results and juxtaposing that with whether the season was successful or unsuccessful. That is not what I'm talking about - and certainly not what the genesis of this debate was started on. The debate started with the statement that "factually speaking our most successful season sans Brady since our first Superbowl." That isn't a factual statement, nor does the retort require context. In professional sports, success = winning. The context is wins and losses.
Even if you (the general you, not specifically you) value the playoff win as two "regular wins", the 2023 team has three more losses than the 2005. There isn't much of way to overcome the extra losses. In a non-Superbowl winning season, more losses cannot equal more success. It simply can't.
Maybe. It gets back to the context issue you avoid/discount. Which is more akin to how the odds-makers discounted the Bucs coming into this season.
For instance, from the data, you might assume the “success” of 2005 didn’t translate to 2006. But you’d miss the injury bug biting hard that year.
I no longer feel the emotions, the undercurrents, leading up to, and during the 2005 season.
It’s why you can’t compare seasons nearly 20 years apart…all context is lost.
This season stands apart because it was unexpected. Many of us hoped it would be successful, but most of us likely believed those experts that said that based on losing the GOAT, and the roster, this team would only win 6 games.
if Kyle Trask had been the QB, the odds-makers/stats guys may have been right. After all, who else were they considering?
The gritty, “never-count-me-out” attitude by Baker, became infectious. You heard the linemen and receivers, heck, even the defense saw & talked about it.
Now, expectations are higher for 2024, but I bet those odds-makers will be looking back on ‘23 - and I bet our odds for winning will improve… what do you bet?
You seem to be talking about preseason expectations vs. end-of-year results and juxtaposing that with whether the season was successful or unsuccessful. That is not what I'm talking about - and certainly not what the genesis of this debate was started on. The debate started with the statement that "factually speaking our most successful season sans Brady since our first Superbowl." That isn't a factual statement, nor does the retort require context. In professional sports, success = winning. The context is wins and losses.
Even if you (the general you, not specifically you) value the playoff win as two "regular wins", the 2023 team has three more losses than the 2005. There isn't much of way to overcome the extra losses. In a non-Superbowl winning season, more losses cannot equal more success. It simply can't.
and yet, it did.
as I’ve said, I hijacked the debate (a bit). I think you may have, perhaps unintentionally, caused me to swerve into that. The 2005 Bucs won more, but did not advance. The 2023 Bucs won less, but did.
Context is needed to sort out the detail.
That isn't a factual statement, nor does the retort require context. In professional sports, success = winning. The context is wins and losses.
What were your TOEFL scores?
in professional sports - every one of them - the goal is winning a championship ie TO BE THE BEST. That is the context. Literally, to win THE (singular) TROPHY. That is the goal and so the measure of success is how close did you come to that ultimate goal.
In 2023 the Bucs almost made it to the CHAMPIONSHIP of their conference.
there is a Lombardi trophy in the NFL the Stanley Cup in hockey
no trophy for having the best wining percentage
and yet, it did.
For those that succumb to recency bias, sure.
For those that don't, it doesn't.
uh, Biggsy, I love ya, and I am never going to press YOU to prove your datasets…but this just in: 2023 Bucs won a playoff game, 2005 Bucs did not.
It kinda did, past tense.
So all this quibbling is over how much Baker Mayfield is worth?
Let me redirect the conversation, so as not to provoke some really fine members and their insights:
it doesn’t sound - from Baker’s own mouth - that he thinks that way, but I’ll bite. What if you lose Baker, but retain Mike Evans, doesn’t that set you back as well? Does it set us back the same, more - or less?
We currently have approximately $36m in space - and some adjustments to other contracts could add some additional room - but the cap is the cap. All sides know it, who do you think is more likely to make demands? Baker? Mike?
I think the franchise tag is free to use February 20th… are we awaiting that?
So all this quibbling is over how much Baker Mayfield is worth?
Let me redirect the conversation, so as not to provoke some really fine members and their insights:
it doesn’t sound - from Baker’s own mouth - that he thinks that way, but I’ll bite. What if you lose Baker, but retain Mike Evans, doesn’t that set you back as well? Does it set us back the same, more - or less?
We currently have approximately $36m in space - and some adjustments to other contracts could add some additional room - but the cap is the cap. All sides know it, who do you think is more likely to make demands? Baker? Mike?
I think the franchise tag is free to use February 20th… are we awaiting that?
Obviously that would be catastrophic, however, the dark horse there is Trask. If Ballerz leaves, Give the Trask the chance he has been waiting for. See what falls to us in the draft and figure it out from there.
As 2 who will demand more. I bet both will be willing to entertain serious "money-talk" with JL and Greenburg, Fairly.
What I think the "smart" move would be is to give Ballerz what he wants. But put it back loaded and full of incentives. That's what I would du anyhoo. It would be like a "proving ground" year after year. And if he keeps getting better and better every year...well he gets a "Raise." Eventually, if he keeps playing well and inflation does inflation things, 5 years we may be saying another steal. I mean, use inflation both ways to help. I mean whose house price hasn't doubled in the past 12 years? My mortgage TODAY feels like an ABSOLUTE STEAL. And if he falls apart, which I doubt, well...everyone moves on. Its not overly hard I don't think.
Leaving the reigns in the hands of Kyle Trask, well… I don’t want to answer my own questions.
Leaving the reigns in the hands of Kyle Trask, well… I don’t want to answer my own questions.
perspective. You see that as a probable downgrade. I see it as an unknown variable…I’ve never truly seen him play. I don’t watch preseason, those games are fake, they don’t count… the bullets aren’t “real.” That’s a small, but HUGE difference. Diamonds result from pressure….pressurized and CHeap charcoal iirc.
Noted.
Only see Trask as a downgrade because he is, as you say, an unknown. Unknowns in the NFL are not typically a good thing…he obviously has some talent, but apparently not talented enough to break onto this roster.
I think we’re getting to the point I am making, though.
Noted.
Only see Trask as a downgrade because he is, as you say, an unknown. Unknowns in the NFL are not typically a good thing…he obviously has some talent, but apparently not talented enough to break onto this roster.
I think we’re getting to the point I am making, though.
Look I choose to See Trasks situation, sumwhat like Rodgers. You know, late 1st rounder vs 2nd rounder, but thematically...both were drafted as "heir apperants" to greatness. Le'Favre and TB12. Rodgers sat for like 3 years and had to "relearn" his mechanics. When He finally got his chance, He owned it beyond his team and fanbases expectations. Is it completely out of the question that Trask couldn't be plugged in and play "pretty good- better than expected" initially then better and better over time? He's sat for 2-3 years already learning and being READY/oncall. I feel for him. In his heart, he just desires a chance. I hope WE ALL get a chance in this Life to show off who WE TRULI are when the bullets are real. Its a much bigger "concept" than just football. Each of us, Trask included, have to surpass our ceilings daily, or we'll become a "dull edge." No way, not me, and hopefully, nun of you bishes either. Go Bucs, and go real ones!!!! Thing is Rodgers has an arm, but his tongue and heart are gross. He was a bish as a backup to LeFavre (IMHO the BETTER QB, he had Ballz-Does no one remember his game after his Father died-That first half alone gave me goosebumps) and has been a bish to anyone brought in to challenge him. So TLDR, Rodgers is just a bish with 2(IIRC) RIngs, at the very LEAST I think Trask AINT NO Bish, and second..if heard his arm is better than we think, from BA and JL, I have no reason to not believe them.
