a) re the use of stats - if that's your sole criteria for evaluating the potential of college qb's, then you're doing a disservice to the debate in general. to say that kellen clemens is at least as good as, if not better, than cutler and base your argument solely on the stats is weak. if stats ruled the day, why don't i read any "draft cody hodges" or "draft brett basenez" threads. better people than i - the ones that get paid to engage in this sort of analysis - have ranked cutler where they have ranked him.
Absolutely. That's called context.
But I wasn't insulting context. Stats were being insulted and that's just silly. That's like arguing you don't like facts.
b) those who advocate the drafting of cutler don't necessarily use stats for their argument. moreso, it's the intangibles, the physical tools, the potential.
The first two, if valuable SHOW UP IN THE STATS. Why would anyone think a 5-6 or whatever he was who lost big games and choked in his showcase has intangibles? Not saying he doesn't, but what makes anyone think he DOES?
If you don't know, or can't prove it, then it's irrelevant.
As for the potential... again, WHY? What makes him have anywhere near the potential of Leinart or Young?
c) vanderbilt's record this year - 5 and 6 - would have been a hell of a lot worse without cutler. name another guy who plays on that team. name one that will get drafted. and it's 5 and 6 in the sec, not that mac or a junior conference. and that should matter, quite a bit. and for fun, let's look at his stats in the last three games. vandy goes 1 and 2 in those games (beat tennessee, lost to florida and kentucky) - losing record, what a shame. cutler's numbers: 147 attempts, 94 completions (64%), 1071 yards, 12 td's, 2 int's. those numbers seem pretty ok to me, but what do i know?
I agree, Vanderbilt stinks. Cutler didn't really make them NOT stink.
And those numbers are great. Must have had some really stinky games early, since those are much better than his season.
Again, I'm not particularly anti-cutler, but I fail to see why he is so coveted. I bet half the people that are dying to have him on the team never even saw him play before yesterday.
To me, honestly, he sounds like a good 2nd round project. You shouldn't sell the farm to get a guy who has bust warning signs on him. He could be fantastic, but he has a much bigger chance of busting than a guy like Leinart or Young.
d) a bias can contribute to invalidating one's argument when it becomes the starting point from which one makes their case. if i've already decided that a player is great or sucks, then conveniently edit my evaluation tools to support my bias (rather than my argument), then i'm not really contributing much to the debate.
Sure you COULD. But you are assuming that the bias led to the "facts" instead of the much more likely "facts led to the bias."
if you really think bias invalidates something someone is saying you need to show that they have something personal invested in player a's success or failure. That's bias.
Not loving a quarterback because the facts or your experience led you to that conclusion isn't bias...
but of course, this is all just my opinion, and that and a quarter will get you a phone call...or is it 35 cents these days
Sure, mine too.
And my guess is that Cutler is the third best qb in the draft. But he's not in the same league as Young or Leinart. At this point he's all potenial and a lot more question marks than those guys.
As to the original argument, please don't think I disagree. Stats are not very useful if you ignore context.. but you can't let overvalue the context either. Just because Cutler gets context points for playing on a bad team doesn't mean that means enough to think he's as good as the elite.
Sometimes a big fish in a small pond, is a pretty small fish in the lake.
