This is totally fascinating and as such an opportunity. I'm in the medical field and this reminds me that comparatively the US health industry is the most scientific in the world. We have metrics up the wazoo, more than any other country. And in all sorts of ways that's a good thing. a great thing. I'm happy to be a part of it, really. But at the same time no one would say that that translates into better health outcomes compared to a bunch of other countries. I do not want to get political at all here about why this is happening; just to note it and how similar on one level it is to this year's MVP vote.
Statistically Lamar should't be considered for the MVP vote, yes. That he will probably win it or even if he comes in second or third, just messes with the statistical models. But ultimately praxis always beats modeling no matter how good statistical modeling is perceived to be. By definition. The trick then is to figure out how to incorporate this year's vote or Cam's MVP win a few years ago into the statistical model so it better reflects reality. That's a difficult trick for sure. Lamar is a huge outlier but he's also pointing to future outcomes like this, occasional as they will be. How to anticipate this statistically is a challenge to put it mildly beginning with as to why this is happening by sorting through all the muddle-headed rationalizations out there.
The thing is Josh Allen is also a huge outlier but he doesn't ever get the benefit of this. Josh Allen does is responsible for 84% of his teams offense but he also is responsible for some of his RBs success rates just like Lamar. It's frustrating that Lamar always gets the "eye test" boost while Allen doesn't. And then they harp on turnovers to bring him down to their size, even though he scores so many more TDs that more than make up for the few extra TOs. It would be great if there is ever a day that people will be able to have honest debates about this.
This is totally fascinating and as such an opportunity. I'm in the medical field and this reminds me that comparatively the US health industry is the most scientific in the world. We have metrics up the wazoo, more than any other country. And in all sorts of ways that's a good thing. a great thing. I'm happy to be a part of it, really. But at the same time no one would say that that translates into better health outcomes compared to a bunch of other countries. I do not want to get political at all here about why this is happening; just to note it and how similar on one level it is to this year's MVP vote.
Statistically Lamar should't be considered for the MVP vote, yes. That he will probably win it or even if he comes in second or third, just messes with the statistical models. But ultimately praxis always beats modeling no matter how good statistical modeling is perceived to be. By definition. The trick then is to figure out how to incorporate this year's vote or Cam's MVP win a few years ago into the statistical model so it better reflects reality. That's a difficult trick for sure. Lamar is a huge outlier but he's also pointing to future outcomes like this, occasional as they will be. How to anticipate this statistically is a challenge to put it mildly beginning with as to why this is happening by sorting through all the muddle-headed rationalizations out there.
The thing is Josh Allen is also a huge outlier but he doesn't ever get the benefit of this. Josh Allen does is responsible for 84% of his teams offense but he also is responsible for some of his RBs success rates just like Lamar. It's frustrating that Lamar always gets the "eye test" boost while Allen doesn't. And then they harp on turnovers to bring him down to their size, even though he scores so many more TDs that more than make up for the few extra TOs. It would be great if there is ever a day that people will be able to have honest debates about this.